![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
% % > % in my experience, plenty of bad ideas survive such "vetting". % > % but those who bring them to IETF still expect the rubber stamp. % > % % > % > True. The point being that the IETF is becoming a "rubber-stamp" for % > work already complete. % % outsiders have tried to treat IETF like a rubber stamp for years; this % is nothing new. but in my experience, IETF doesn't function that way - % working groups feel quite free to change or discard earlier work. % (some are even hostile to earlier work) % % Keith % As have "insiders". And yes, I've seen WG try and discard earlier work... (btw, whats the distinguishing characteristic between an "outsider" and an "insider"?) -- --bill
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.