Re: Response to the Appeal by [...]

To: Frank Ellermann <nobody at xyzzy.claranet.de>,ietf at ietf.org
Subject: Re: Response to the Appeal by [...]
From: JFC Morfin <jefsey at jefsey.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 23:38:15 +0200
Cc:
In-reply-to: <44BBDC72.3C43@xyzzy.claranet.de>
List-help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <E1G008B-0004Me-5W@ietf.org> <p07000c08c0e148f01132@[216.43.25.67]> <44BBDC72.3C43@xyzzy.claranet.de>

At 20:52 17/07/2006, Frank Ellermann wrote:

Refusing to address such issues could be interpreted as some
kind of evidence by the claimant.  Better they try it even if
they get it wrong - after all this is IMO about an "attempt to
enforce netiquette" on two mailing lists,


Correct. Not the purpose of RFC 3683.

not a "human rights" question for the UN.


Correct. But RFC 3935 + the IESG response is.
jfc

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

References:
- Re: Response to the Appeal by JFC Morfin dated 2006-02-17
  - From: Pete Resnick
- Re: Response to the Appeal by [...]
  - From: Frank Ellermann

Prev by Date: Re: Response to the Appeal by [...]
Next by Date: Re: Meetings in other regions
Previous by thread: Re: Response to the Appeal by [...]
Next by thread: IAOC Office hour
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

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

Re: Response to the Appeal by [...]

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