The IETF Annoyances
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

The IETF Annoyances



Hello:

No, this is not an O'Reilly Book. But, thanks for asking!
I notice, there are two types of annoyances at this IETF list.

(1) posting unrelated things, eg. "un-subscribe", and perhaps ...
    err... this message too :-(

(2) posting already known problems with multiple recepients, again 
    and again, eg. Jim F*ing. But alas, he (Jim F*ing) has his 
    points! All what he does is exploiting the "I* loopholes"!
    There are severe problems with the current IAB and IANA 
    structure, and using their "right to remain silence" is obviously
    not the answer!

Well, this is not an engineering problem. Perhaps, its time
to create the ISTF (Internet Sociology Task Force :-).
So, why I am still here at the IETF list? Thanks again for 
asking :-). I am still here for three things:

(1) I belive that the IETF is a great thing. Well, at least it
    used to be. The whole I* used to be a "research thing". Trouble
    started when the I* evolved into a mutan like today as everyone
    has started to have each own perception. My personal interest 
    is to understand more on how the I* really (used to) work.

(2) In related with point #1, I still am unfortunated to have the
    TLD-ID burden with me (see also <http://idnic.vlsm.org>).
    For that, as early as 1994, I was bullied by the guys from
    "psg.com" and "nsf.gov"! All I have now, is the lousy RFC-1591
    and a (better) gTLD-MoU.

(3) In related with point #1 and #2, my objective is to write more
    guidance for newcomers to the I* world. Perhaps as 
    informational RFC, or just as webpages, or just as (argh..) 
    scientific papers.


tabe,

-- 
Rahmat M.Samik-Ibrahim-VLSM-TJT http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/6825
- 501(C)laude Levi-Strauss' Non-Profit Structuralism Jeans(m/tic) -



Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.