Re: my posting to newdom@ar.com

"Richard J. Sexton" <richard@vrx.net> Wed, 20 August 1997 23:21 UTC

Received: from ietf.org by ietf.org id aa22360; 20 Aug 97 19:21 EDT
Received: from ns1.vrx.net by ietf.org id aa22314; 20 Aug 97 19:21 EDT
Received: from mbv1-ipl-ri3.kos.net(really [206.186.41.41]) by vrx.net via sendmail with smtp id <m0x1K4b-0002kxC@vrx.net> for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Aug 1997 19:21:57 -0400 (EDT) (Smail-3.2.0.92 1997-Feb-9 #2 built 1997-Apr-8)
Message-Id: <m0x1K4b-0002kxC@vrx.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 19:21:57 -0400 (EDT)
X-Sender: richard@vrx.net
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
To: perry@piermont.com
Sender: ietf-request@ietf.org
From: "Richard J. Sexton" <richard@vrx.net>
Subject: Re: my posting to newdom@ar.com
Cc: perry@piermont.com, ietf@ietf.org
Source-Info: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.

At 07:14 PM 8/20/97 -0400, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
>
>"Richard J. Sexton" writes:
>> >Mr. Sexton, the IETF is a voluntary organization. The members have
>> >decided they don't want to address the issue. You have no way to force
>> >them to do so. You are free to found another organization consisting
>> >of people of a different opinion. Now, could you please stop
>> >broadcasting this topic to thousands of uninterested IETF members who
>> >have decided they don't want to deal with this issue?
>> 
>> Good point. Now how do you suggest the IETF members who are interested
>> in the issue organize?
>
>I SUGGEST THEY ORGANIZE SOMEWHERE ELSE.

With all due respect, Perry, you have a bit of a vested interest
here, and if it's unanimous that no IETF'ers want to do anything
I'll understand, but I wasn't aware your voice was authoratative for
all of the IETF.