Dear Colleagues, I'm reading the proceedings of the IETF for the past few months. They surprise me very much. I thought that the IETF was a serious institution seriously publishing serious standards. I realized that his organization is not made for that and I wonder how it can publish something serious : I believe that the Dratf John is serious, but it should not be a new document for us @large to read. It should be an update of SMTP Page in the IETF Internet reference wiki.
I also read in detail the appeal of John Klensin. Most of the things he asks seem obvious. And yet he's losing time to document them, and many intelligent minds waste time on it, while the appeal relates solely to the IESG. The real debate will be after the IESG response and before a possible appeal to the IAB. Why not to wait for it. Or is this some kind of pressure ? If I understood correctly, this appeal is not asking to IESG judge, but to document its defence. Would not it be easier to create a WG-IETF, which would be mandated to rebuild a IETF for today where a method, procedures, a logic of work would be automated, with human decision points well documented? This would allow the brains of engineers to worry about the Internet and its users, rather than about internal disputes and the IESG? The appeal would then simply concern the review of the three lines defining the DISCUSS decision point in the IESG page. My idea is it so stupid? -- LB _______________________________________________ IETF mailing list IETF@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
