[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Submitted ID not by original authors (i.e., a hack/hijack)

> I hope this was intended as a joke.

+1
 
> If we had to prosecute all the standards related people who made
> mistakes like this at some time in their lives for treason, there
would
> not be many left.
> 
> The first lesson I try and teach new people is to understand the rules
> and working methods, and that is because the default of most of them
is
> not to bother and head straight in with the technical stuff.
> 
> regards
> 
> Keith
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: wgchairs-bounces at ietf.org
> > [mailto:wgchairs-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of Bernard Aboba
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 11:54 PM
> > To: 'Fred Baker'; chair at ietf.org; 'IAOC Jabberr'
> > Cc: 'Working Group Chairs'
> > Subject: RE: Submitted ID not by original authors (i.e., a
> > hack/hijack)
> >
> > I would agree that this should be taken seriously.  The
> > timing (on the occasion of a major state visit) is
> > suspicious, and the "new" authors are employees of a
> > government agency.
> >
> > Of course, this does not necessarily mean that the "new
> > authors" were actually responsible.  But it seems quite
> > unlikely to me that this was an accident.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: wgchairs-bounces at ietf.org
> > [mailto:wgchairs-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of Fred Baker
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 2:18 PM
> > To: chair at ietf.org; IAOC Jabberr
> > Cc: Working Group Chairs
> > Subject: Re: Submitted ID not by original authors (i.e., a
> > hack/hijack)
> >
> > re-directing the conversation a bit. This seems like pretty
> > egregious behavior.
> >
> > I would recommend that the IETF instruct the Secretariat to
> > fall back to the WG-agreed version, and that the IETF
> > consider appropriate responses under RFC 3184.
> >
> >
> >
> >