Re: A distinction along Pete's dimensions

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

 



On 4/7/2016 3:56 PM, John C Klensin wrote:
The two cases may be hard to distinguish from a distance, but
they are very different.


I'm going to suggest that, in practical terms for the IETF, it doesn't matter.

It doesn't matter because none of the theory or formal issues can be reliably and accurately applied for issues of social concern.

What matters is whatever the community decides it cares about at the time we are looking at the area.


Here's my logic:

While some regions -- especially Asia -- have been challenging for finding venues, we already have an extensive track-record of finding places the community deems acceptable. Consequently, we have safe harbors to fall back on, for each of the 3 regions we regularly visit.

So when a new country or city is being considered -- and by new, I think I mean 'we have never been there', but perhaps we need to leave room for reconsideration of previously-visited places? -- we float the general countries and maybe cities to the community and wait for support and objections.


Whatever criteria the community chooses to apply at that time are the relevant criteria. No theory or modeling or documentation or even consistency -- and especially no guessing and no errors by an anointed body -- are required.


d/

--

  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net




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