Subject: Re: Possible RFC 3683 PR-action.

From: LB <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 00:24:57 +0100

Gentlemen,
Since I agreed to replace JFC Morfin to the IETF I sent less than ten
mails. Most had two abnormal reasons. (a)To explain that I am not JFC
Morfin. (b) Because our commercial opponents of our non-commercial
approach did not asked, politely or not, before to accuse me of it;
and to mock my name as did my primary school classmates very long ago.
For their information, we are 5 Louis Blériot to have the phone in
France, more than Randy Presuhns (I just got into red list because of
him).

The one you fear suggested I accept the suggestion of a member of the
IESG: I said that I would ask my friends purely technical
contributions, as much as possible in the form of Drafts. In order not
to waste the time at the IESG.

So it seems to me that the current debate, which I do not have much
time to spend and who is in a language that I do not master, has two
other goals.

- Discredit these Drafts in case they would allow the internet to "work better".
- Protect all the commercial interests by wanting paying members. As
if IETF was afraid that the non-profit lead users may join.

I see what is happening: one wants to prevent small businesses to
speak to the IETF. A single JFC Morfin to protect many's culture,
language, occupation, family was already too much for our competitors
(who came together to sign the PR-action against him). Now one does
certainly not all those he represented!

Is that correct IETF?
-- 
LB
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:29:16 +0100

--On Wednesday, March 26, 2008 00:24:57 +0100 LB <[email-masked]> wrote:

> - Protect all the commercial interests by wanting paying
> members. As if IETF was afraid that the non-profit lead users may join.

c'mon.... neihter JFC nor LB has ever offered a draft, or even outlined a 
comprehensible strategy.

One person that the IETF trusts saying that he's verified that "JFC" and 
"LB" are distinct persons would end this debate forever. Posting anonymous 
messages to the list proclaiming that they're different accomplishes 
exactly nothing.

Put up or shut up.

                     Harald

---

From: "Randy Presuhn" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:43:24 -0800

Hi -

> From: "Harald Tveit Alvestrand" <[email-masked]>
> To: "LB" <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
> Cc: <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 6:29 AM
> Subject: Re: Possible RFC 3683 PR-action.
...
> c'mon.... neihter JFC nor LB has ever offered a draft,

JFTR https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/draft-mltf-jfcm-cctags/

> or even outlined a 
...

No comment.

Randy