Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: Changes needed to Last Call boilerplate]

From: [email-masked] (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 09:58:44 -0500 (EST)

> From: Henk Uijterwaal <[email-masked]>

    > What is exactly the problem we're trying to solve here?

Having people's mailboxes explode from ill-considered public pressure
campaigns? At the start, I got as much email in one hour as I often get in a
week.

    > Do we really want to introduce all kinds of complex procedures just
    > based on one incident?

Well, it's not the first time - the FSF pulled the same stunt back in October
of 2007. And no doubt, if it continues to be allowed, it will happen again.

My original proposal was very simple: create one more list as a formal notice
place for LC's, since many of the FSF drive-by posters were saying 'but, but
your LC said send comments here'.

Anyway, nothing is stopping an IETF person from sending email to the IETF list
about something they want to bring up there, so if an LC has something that
really bugs someone in the IETF, they can still send email to the IETF list
about it.

	Noel

---

From: "HUANG, ZHIHUI (JERRY), ATTLABS" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 10:43:44 -0500

Noel Chiappa said on Friday, February 13, 2009 8:59 AM
>campaigns? At the start, I got as much email in one hour as I often get
in a

That's really not the problem, is it? The problem is that we are forced
to deal with "ill-considered public pressure campaigns". I forgot who
made it but the previous proposal of subtle changes in the LC language
would go a long way of dissuading future campaigns, IMHO. On the other
hand, why not have someone in an official capacity (IETF Chair or some
such) work with FSF on the best way to contribute to IETF work, instead
of instigating email campaigns that only serves to irk the IETF
community in general?
Their position (as stated in John Sullivan's email) is not that
unreasonable. We shouldn't assume that FSF will not learn from feedbacks
- aside from condescending comments.

>of 2007. And no doubt, if it continues to be allowed, it will happen
again.

Isn't that the right price to pay for an open forum? Or are we going to
have a committee pre-screen submitted for technical merits before being
posted to mailing lists? 

>really bugs someone in the IETF, they can still send email to the IETF
list

Of course, this works. If you know the secret handshake, your opinion
will be heard; else your comments are delivered to a bit bucket where no
one with apparently sound technical mind will ever see - since _they_
know better than to subscribe to "LC comment's mailing list". 

--
Jerry Huang, AT&T Labs, +1 630 810 7679
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf