I too agree with Mohsen's comments, overall. What Mohsen points out as true
eight years ago continues to be true even now. Not a lot changed, IMHO. I
believe, it had gotten worse. IESG continues to wield enormous influence over
the independent submissions sent to the RFC editor. The RFC editor needs to be
independent.

regards,
suresh

--- Mohsen BANAN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> >>>>> On Sun, 19 Mar 2006 04:56:57 +0100, Harald Alvestrand
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> >>>>> On Sat, 18 Mar 2006 21:10:10 -0800, Dave Crocker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
> 
>   Harald> What's the point of reposting this message now?
> 
>   Dave> Seems like there ought to be a statute of limitations.
> 
> In response to both of you: the point of referring
> to eight-year old history is not to disinter the
> corpse of the past.
> 
> The point is that this history is directly
> relevent to a current discussion thread.
> 
> I believe I made the point of reposting clear in
> the following header:
> 
>   Mohsen> [ This is a repost from 6 Nov 1998.
>   Mohsen>   In particular the section on:
>   Mohsen>      o Separate The RFC Publication Service from the IETF/IESG/IAB.
>   Mohsen>   is relevant to the current:
>   Mohsen>        STRAW PROPOSAL RFC Editor charter
>   Mohsen>   thread. ]
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 




_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Reply via email to