On Aug 3, 2013, at 9:49 AM, Olle E. Johansson <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 2 aug 2013 kl. 14:13 skrev Scott Brim <[email protected]>: > >> I'm completely against participating anonymously because of IPR issues. >> I'm mostly against pseudonymous participation for the same reason. I >> need to be able to know who I'm dealing with, in order to know if there >> are IPR issues that should be brought up. > > THat's exactly the problem. Unfortunately the world requires the IETF to > manage IPR. There's a reason why we need to be strict with the note well. > Anonymous remote *PARTICIPATION* breaks the requirements of the > note well acceptance in my view. Hi Olle The participation in the IETF is already pseudonymous. I have a driver's license, a passport, and a national ID card, all proving that my name is indeed Yoav Nir. But I have never been asked to present any of them at the IETF. I claim to work for Check Point, and my email address tends to suggest it, but a lot of participants use gmail addresses. I had participated in IETF mailing lists for 3 years before ever attending a meeting, and I got RFC 4478 published before attending one. At that point, none of the IETF regulars had ever seen me - I was just a claimed name on the mailing list and on the draft. As I don't have to prove an identity when registering for meetings, if that had been a ruse, I could continue running with it to this day, although by now there are two participants who can link the IETF participant with the name I use at work. BTW: nobody's stopping anybody from creating a new gmail account under the name "Yoav Nir", registering to IETF mailing lists, and posting in my name. Unless I notice it and cry foul, nobody would be the wiser. Yoav
