[27934] in North American Network Operators' Group
RE: independent publication (was Re: DSUA)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Roeland M. J. Meyer)
Thu Mar 30 11:55:16 2000
Reply-To: <rmeyer@mhsc.com>
From: "Roeland M. J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>
To: "'William Allen Simpson'" <wsimpson@greendragon.com>,
"'Joshua Goodall'" <joshua@ip.versatel.net>,
"Karl Auerbach (E-mail)" <karl@CAVEBEAR.COM>
Cc: <bmanning@vacation.karoshi.com>, <nanog@merit.edu>,
"Harald Alvestrand (E-mail)" <Harald@Alvestrand.no>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 08:51:23 -0800
Message-ID: <002501bf9a68$2f3964b0$eaaf6cc7@PEREGRIN>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <38E37708.4D8B3FFF@greendragon.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
> William Allen Simpson
> Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 7:48 AM
>
> The IESG has become severely politicized these days, and has some
> serious internal problems.
If this keeps up, these tracks will be re-routed.
> They've even rejected Bradner and my DES retirement BCP, although
> virtually every IETF working group from PPP to SAAG recommended it.
> We're planning on asking the RFC Editor for publication as
> Informational, instead. Presumably Manning can go that route, too.
>
> My "IKE/ISAKMP Considered Harmful" was the only draft ever summarily
> removed from the internet-drafts FTP site, because it is critical
> of the IESG. It was published by Usenix ;login: in December.
Given this sort of behavior, I wonder how much longer the IESG will retain
their credibility?
> There are some pretty good starts on operational web sites, linked to
> by the NANOG page. It would be helpful to be more active in
> maintaining
> (actively organizing) the links. What formalities do we need to have
> such a thing come to fruition?
>
> Do we really need a formal paper (hardcopy) publication?
Given recent output of IAB, IESG, and IETF, it is becoming clear that these
orgs are no longer purely technical. Rather, they are becoming highly
politicized. As such, they will lose credibility for their
value-proposition, as being apolitical technical bodies. Once their
neutrality is gone, they will soon follow. They sad part is that those geeks
don't see that.
