How does the IETF work? (was:Re: Ah, I see the cause of the situation now... (tls-authz situation)

Alessandro Vesely <ale.whop@gmail.com> Wed, 11 February 2009 08:52 UTC

Return-Path: <ale.whop@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71B9A3A6972 for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Feb 2009 00:52:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.719
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.719 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TLlBpCygouUe for <ietf@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Feb 2009 00:52:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wmail.tana.it (mail.tana.it [62.94.243.226]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7BB13A67C1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Feb 2009 00:52:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [172.25.197.158] (pcale.tana [172.25.197.158]) (AUTH: CRAM-MD5 ale@tana.it, TLS: TLS1.0, 256bits, RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1) by wmail.tana.it with esmtp; Wed, 11 Feb 2009 09:52:57 +0100 id 00000000005DC03F.00000000499291E9.00001B05
Message-ID: <499291E8.4060407@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 09:52:56 +0100
From: Alessandro Vesely <ale.whop@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Hallam-Baker, Phillip" <pbaker@verisign.com>
Subject: How does the IETF work? (was:Re: Ah, I see the cause of the situation now... (tls-authz situation)
References: <C5B75C00.3049%mshore@cisco.com> <2788466ED3E31C418E9ACC5C3166155768B27A@mou1wnexmb09.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
In-Reply-To: <2788466ED3E31C418E9ACC5C3166155768B27A@mou1wnexmb09.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 13:57:05 -0800
Cc: Melinda Shore <mshore@cisco.com>, Alex Loret de Mola <edgarverona@gmail.com>, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 17:33:39 -0000

Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
> I think Melinda makes a good point here.
>  
> [..]
>  
> RMS has a certain number of supporters who are willing to write letters. 
> That does not mean that RMS's opinion should hold greater weight than 
> that of other people.

We must assume that each writer is expressing her or his own opinion, 
not that of some generic leader or employer. Otherwise, how do we 
explain, say, the MARID case?

I'm not a psychohistorian, but I'd guess that if the IETF had been 
fairly immune from interest driven pressures, the FSF wouldn't have 
needed to start that campaign in the first place.