[9434] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: Aikens last (but long) posting/comments on ISOC and related issues
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Simon Poole)
Wed Jan 5 10:14:17 1994
To: KLENSIN@infoods.mit.edu (John C Klensin)
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 1994 16:17:49 +0100 (MET)
Cc: poole@magnolia.eunet.ch, Erik.Huizer@surfnet.nl, AIKEN@ccc.nersc.gov,
In-Reply-To: <01H7BGWOO0ZO0006RC@INFOODS.UNU.EDU> from "John C Klensin" at Jan 5, 94 08:59:10 am
From: Simon Poole <poole@magnolia.eunet.ch>
> But initiating a WG--actually getting one started--requires
> approval of the applicable ADs, and review and approval by IESG,
> and review and approval from IAB. The CXII *proposal* has
> _not_ turned into a WG under the draft charter from which you
> quoted. As Erik said in more detail, it won't, either.
>
> So, from your point of view, the system is working: IETF has not
> chartered a WG whose charter and scope you think is
> unreasonable. Unless you object to the idea of a proposal
> being made, what is the problem here?
John, I think there is a misunderstanding - I simply quoted the
CXII proposal as an example that there is a danger of this kind
of work being done in the context of the IETF. In particular
I didn't make a statement as to if in this specific case the system
is working or not, which would be very hard since I hadn't seen
any feedback from the AD's to the members of the CXII group at all
up to Erik's mail.
Judging from the discussions on the CXII list however I must assume
they are still think that everything is proceding as normal.
Simon
