[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: grip-wg@TransSys.COM
- Subject: Re: draft-ietf-grip-isp-expectations-03.txt
- From: Randy Bush <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 01 Jun 2000 15:33:52 -0700
- Comment: grip-wg mailing list add/drop requests to Majordomo@TransSys.COM
a fair number of iesg members, including i, have sympathy with mo's type
from a european operator [His email to me was in Swedish, so an iesg member
had to translate and summarize]
First response is from one person at KPN/Quest. His conclusion is that the
authors seems to belive that for example Europe is like the US, but with
"just" different languages in the different states.
He continues to say that his experience is that many of the things
listed in the document is not possible to implement in an agreement
with a customer as it breaks the local legislation, partly because of
the level of details.
[ the isp contunues the conversation in the first person and in english ]
this is where I think the biggest problem is. The paper states :
"Under no circumstances is it the intention of this document to
dictate business practices."
but in practice this exactly what the paper does. Including the
authentication statement. If this was only a suggestion of a good way
to do opertional behaviour I would have no problem with it. But to a large
extent the paper more or less puts requirments on the IPS: - requirements
that the ISP:s can not always fullfill due to foreign or local
legislation. It takes up subjects that can (or should be) regulated in the
customer agreement. What you can put into these varies greatly from
country to country.
I agree that the IETF should not take political considerations and only
work from a technical view point. But it that case - it should not produce
papers that is walking a very thin line either.