IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: improving WG operation

"Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com> Tue, 10 May 2005 23:50 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DVeUe-00060w-II; Tue, 10 May 2005 19:50:28 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1DVeUc-0005xb-1z for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 10 May 2005 19:50:26 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA04905 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 May 2005 19:50:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from robin.verisign.com ([65.205.251.75]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1DVek0-0008P0-31 for ietf@ietf.org; Tue, 10 May 2005 20:06:21 -0400
Received: from mou1wnexcn01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com (mailer1.verisign.com [65.205.251.34]) by robin.verisign.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id j4ANo6jg010357; Tue, 10 May 2005 16:50:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from MOU1WNEXMB04.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com ([10.25.13.157]) by mou1wnexcn01.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Tue, 10 May 2005 16:50:06 -0700
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0
Date: Tue, 10 May 2005 16:50:05 -0700
Message-ID: <198A730C2044DE4A96749D13E167AD37250259@MOU1WNEXMB04.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
Thread-Topic: improving WG operation
Thread-Index: AcVVqcPeIUlhLzJ/TXGanFG5dxeFHwADkieQ
From: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com>
To: "JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@jefsey.com>, Dean Anderson <dean@av8.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 May 2005 23:50:06.0249 (UTC) FILETIME=[FDEEC990:01C555BA]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 856eb5f76e7a34990d1d457d8e8e5b7f
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: improving WG operation
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org

> Just remember that Internet users have designed P2P, VoIP, 
> NATs, etc. for 
> some and that others have more processing and communication 
> powers than the 
> whole AT&T 20 years ago) and you never know who will need 
> what (even if 
> 99.99% will never read an RFC, they will all read RFC quotes 
> and they must 
> be clear and consistent with what their consultant, their ISP, their 
> operator will tell them). What I mean is there is no Internet 
> "gnosis", 
> there should only be an Internet "gospel".

Exactly, do I have to send an engineer to every IETF WG meeting just to
make sure that they don't decide to delete some feature of some protocol
that I am depending on?


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email