Brian E Carpenter wrote: > Bob Braden wrote: >> *> So the cases where we have a conflict are: >> *> *> 1) The RFC Editor decides to publish documents that it knows >> are harmful *> to the Internet >> >> Harald, >> >> This case is ludicrous. The RFC Editor would certainly never publish a >> document that it believes to be harmful to the Internet. However, in >> fact no one can ever know for sure whether harm will result from >> publication of any particular specification. It is all relative. > > I assume that Harald included this case as something of a reductio > ad absurdum - and I assume we all agree that such a foolish (and > unlikely) decision would be grounds for action by the IAB.
Action by the ISOC as contractor, *if* this is considered violation of the contract. I still haven't seen a mechanism for governance of the RFC Editor that addresses independent process sufficiently, and still disagree with the IAB as that arbiter. Joe
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ INDEPENDENT mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/independent
