Re: Last Call: <draft-farrell-perpass-attack-02.txt> (Pervasive Monitoring is an Attack) to Best Current Practice

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 1/1/14 11:09 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> I disagree. I think if we constantly desist in taking any action
> because there are inevitably a number of nay-sayers, then we've
> lost. And in this particular case, a BCP is exactly the right thing.

I really don't think so, at least not in its current form.  I
think it's fine to publish it as-is as an opinion piece but it seems
to me that if it's going to be published as a "BCP" it really needs
to be clearer about specifically what is going to change in the
current document development and publication process.  I'd be a little
alarmed if somebody today decided that there's IETF consensus on
publishing as a BCP and that the inevitable nay-sayers can be
ignored; there seems to me to be significant dissent.

Melinda





[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]