Not that I am not sympathetic to what GNU and FSF is campaigning for, the working principle of IETF is based on running codes and rough consensus. "Votes" or "Petitions" is not part of IETF process the last time I check.
I am not familiar with draft-housley-tls-authz-extns but if the only objections is that there are patents surrounding it, I don't see any harm proceeding it as an Experimental RFC. If there are other valid reasons to stop the publication of the draft, we should review it. It is also important to note how many objected to the publication. I suggest the moderator (if there is one) to held up all petition furthers and just post a summary of how many petitions received at the end. -James Seng On 10/27/07, Noel Chiappa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > From: "Joel M. Halpern" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > We have published encumbered experimental and informational documents > > on many occasions. I can see no reason not to do so in this case. Given > > that it appears that experimental publication is sufficient for the > > registration needs that go with this document, I strongly support > > publication. > > I concur - and I think this is the action we should take, no matter how many > emails we see from people we've never heard from before (and probably never > will again). > > Noel > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > [email protected] > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
