Keith Moore wrote:
I'm also getting the impression that there need to be explicit
constraints on the SAA, and also some kind of transparency and
accountability, to keep the SAA from having a chilling effect on
discussion of matters relevant to IETF - technical protocol
standards, publication of such standards, and the running of the
organization itself.
I'm afraid the current situation is already too bad for
people not to be able to argue against SAAs.
Below is a copy of part of mail from shyam bandyopadhyay
<shyamb66@xxxxxxxxx> sent on August 21th to several people
including me and CCed to several lists including IETF list:
Subject: Re: Why do we need to go with 128 bits address space ?
> Benjamin Kaduk has said:
>
>> Suresh also requested, as responsible Area Director, that you direct
>> technical discussions on this topic to the 6man mailing list. Why
do you
>> feel it is appropriate to cross-post to two additional very broad forums
>> despite the existence of a more topical forum?
>
> As I had said earlier, Fred Baker had suggested to send this
> as a proposal to the IRTF list, Robert Moskowoitz
> suggested to move it to the IETF mailing list.
> Also, I wanted this topic to be discussed within a broader circle
> as people involved with the 6man list will be influenced with the
> thought process that they are involved in, but others will look
> at it from a neutral point of view.
>
> I do apologies to everyone if this happens to be a wastage of time.
though I can't find it in IETF ML archive. But, as it was sent to
this list, it is not a problem to send part of it here again.
Masataka Ohta
