On Jan 6, 2014, at 5:45 PM, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 01/06/2014 08:51 PM, John Curran wrote: >> >> What happens when the IETF makes a decision that particular "public policy" requirements >> are _to be considered_ (perpass), or specifically _not to be considered_ (RFC 2804) in protocol >> development? > > I think that's a mis-characterisation. IMO both of those are cases > where there are sound technical reasons for the IETF to do, or not > do, work. Yes, those have impacts, but the public policy angle (if > that's the right term) is a side-effect and is not the reason for > the decision. Stephen - I did not mean to imply that the primary driver was the IETF taking on a public policy matter; only that the decision being made (even if on a sound technical basis) have real public policy implications, and thus will attract interest of many non-technical parties, including governments. /John Disclaimer: My views alone.