[saag] Re: New Version Notification for draft-rsalz-crypto-registries-00.txt

["D. J. Bernstein" <[e-mail]>]

Paul Wouters writes:
> personal attacks

No. ADs are official IETF roles. It is not a personal attack to state
that an AD, after indisputably being informed that a WG adopted an NTRU
Prime document, issued false claims of IETF consensus "that there is no
appetite for NTRUprime". It is not a personal attack to summarize this
AD action as fraud. These are complaints about official IETF actions
that the IETF corporation (ISOC etc.) is liable for under antitrust law.

I had tried simply pointing out the facts; Rich Salz also spoke up. The
AD response at that point should have been to issue an erratum. Instead
the AD response was to double down on the same fiction. Clear warning
labels seem necessary to prevent this AD disinformation from warping
subsequent SAAG discussions.

For comparison, here's an example of one of the personal attacks issued
earlier in the thread by the AD, in violation of BCP 54: "you seem to
want to have the benefits of the IETF process while skipping the IETF
process that yields that value to the community".

> > You're on record claiming, e.g., that "the cryptographic research
> > communities are focusing on NIST candidates ... Should the IETF really
> > recommend a dropped candidate at this stage? I do not think so".
> again, misquoting

https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/saag/9e1QheO1L6SVBX3a8mFSij9AgHw/

The quote is perfectly accurate, and the surrounding message expresses
the same do-only-what-NIST-does position in more detail.

---D. J. Bernstein