On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 3:12 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.resc...@gmx.de>wrote:
> On 2011-09-07 00:01, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > >> On 2011-09-07 09:35, Ted Hardie wrote: >> ... >> >>> My personal opinion for some time has been that we ought to recognize >>> that >>> the previous PS moved into "WG draft" years ago and that anything named >>> an >>> RFC should be recognized as something that market will consider a >>> standard. >>> >> >> And who raised the bar? It wasn't the IESG, it was the market, and more >> specifically the product managers and IT managers who adopted RFC >> conformance >> as their criterion. >> >> I'm a bit fed up with the IESG being blamed for this, rather than being >> congratulated on adapting to it. >> ... >> > > Well, if that's really what happened, then draft-housley-two-maturity-**levels > seems to solve the wrong problem. > > Best regards, Julian > In at least one reading, it could be said that this draft is trying to push against that market perception by re-lowering the bar for PS, contrary to the market reality. I occasionally find a little windmill tilting refreshing, but I'm confused, Brian, as to why you both want the IESG congratulated for adapting to that reality and simultaneously wants them to adopt this. But possibly a hobgoblin is preying on my little mind, despite my being neither statesman, nor philosopher, nor divine. Ted
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
