Re: Agenda for the next IETF meeting in Sante Fe

Marshall Rose <mrose@dbc.mtview.ca.us> Wed, 18 September 1991 02:43 UTC

Received: from nisc.psi.net by NRI.NRI.Reston.VA.US id aa27905; 17 Sep 91 22:43 EDT
Received: by nisc.psi.net (5.61/2.1-PSINet Operations ) id AA06106; Tue, 17 Sep 91 22:32:58 -0400
Received: from fernwood.mpk.ca.us by nisc.psi.net (5.61/2.1-PSINet Operations ) id AA06102; Tue, 17 Sep 91 22:32:52 -0400
Received: by fernwood.mpk.ca.us; id AA15491; Tue, 17 Sep 91 19:34:20 -0700
Received: from localhost by dbc.mtview.ca.us (4.1/Anterior/SMI-4.0) id AA19315; Tue, 17 Sep 91 19:03:38 PDT
To: Karl.Auerbach@eng.sun.com
Reply-To: snmp-wg@nisc.psi.net
Cc: snmp-wg@nisc.psi.net
Subject: Re: Agenda for the next IETF meeting in Sante Fe
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 17 Sep 91 10:59:49 PDT." <9109171759.AA25479@Eng.Sun.COM>
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1991 19:03:36 -0700
Message-Id: <19314.685159416@dbc.mtview.ca.us>
From: Marshall Rose <mrose@dbc.mtview.ca.us>

Karl -

According to RFC1250, "IAB OFFICIAL PROTOCOL STANDARDS", RFC1212 has
been advanced to Draft Standard protocol status.  As such, it will be
another six months before RFC1212 can be considered for advancement to
Standard protocol status.

I have heard no statement from either the IAB or IESG indicating that
this document is being sent back.  Until I receive word from either
organization, I believe you are wrong in your assertion that the RFC is
supposedly being sent back to the working group.

However, while we are on this topic, I will confess to becoming
increasingly annoyed at people who, when they don't get their way in the
working group, feel no hesitation to start lobbying the IAB to get
things turned around to their liking, introducing delay and confusion
into the process.  This does not serve the community interest.  However,
if this is going to be the modus operandi, then perhaps we should
dissolve all the working groups, and have the IAB produce and ratify all
the documents.  That way, we can be assured that we have to fight each
battle only once, rather than this tiresome bit of person X losing in
the working group, person X reintroducing the issue to the IESG to get
the decision to go the other way, person X losing there, person X
reintroducing the issue to the IAB to get the decision to go the other
way, etc.  Frankly, I am getting tired of this nonsense.

/mtr