On Nov 29, 2012, at 4:42, Eliot Lear wrote:
To me, when "projecting authority" one is either demonstrating a deeper understanding of the topic than others or is bullying the others. So I have a mixed reaction to that statement. One the one hand it could be that work done elsewhere and brought the IETF comes along with people helping to educate the IETF or comes with people bullying the IETF. I guess what I'm trying to express is that when baked work is brought into the IETF it is subjective whether the process is healthy or not. Earlier in the thread I saw that someone expressed dismay that BOFs seem to be WG's that have already been meeting in secret. I agree with that. At the last meeting in Atlanta, I filled in sessions with BOFs and found that the ones I chose seemed as if they were already on the way to a predetermined solution. Only one had a presentation trying to set up the problem to be solved, others just had detailed talks on draft solutions. In one there was a complaint that the mail list wasn't very active - not a WG, a BOF! Not very engaging. Bringing in baked work because there are multiple independent and non-interoperable solutions is what the IETF is all about. Bringing in a baked specification just to get a stamp on it is not.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Edward Lewis NeuStar You can leave a voice message at +1-571-434-5468 There are no answers - just tradeoffs, decisions, and responses. |