[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
On Wed, 30 Oct 2002, RJ Atkinson wrote:
> > The IETF doesn't get to disallow things.
> IETF WGs have used requirements documents to disallow proposals for
> years, not sure why you have concluded otherwise.
Yes, the IETF has jurisdiction over its wgs, but not over much of
anything else. People ignore IETF wisdom all the time. That's why the
IETF is under the obligation to come up with solutions that are so good
people really want them, rather than adopt them because they're told to.
> > I'm missing the part where you say what should be in the requirements
> > instead.
> I've made numerous comments on the requirements draft over the life of
> this WG,
> as the archives clearly show. Not sure how you missed all of them,
> but checking the WG archives should reveal them all.
Without going back and reading everything, I think it's safe to say it
would be impossible to include all the comments everyone made over the
life time of this wg into the requirements. So if you could state in
which way you'd want the requirements to change, based on the current
situation, that would be good.