David, Your actions as co-chair of this group represent a conflict of interest for so long as Huawei maintains it has an intellectual property claim with respect to its work. I would request that you either step down as co-chair of the group, cease employment with Huawei or convince Huawei to cease the IPR action. Of course the latter two of these are not what I would call reasonable demands to make of anyone given that there are financial issues (and more) involved, but I would request that you step down as co-chair of this group.
I would also ask Darren Moffat (and others within this IETF group) to ignore this request and others coming from you, regardless of their relevance to the IPR, because your involvement with Huawei makes you unfit for this role within the syslog IETF group. If you do not wish to step down then the best we can do is to ignore your attempts to continue to function in this role and continue to apply pressure for it to be resolved. This group needs to develop open standards, not IP for Huawei. Your involvement as co-chair and Huawei's IPR claim cast that shadow over this group. I'm sure we all would welcome your continued involvement with the group, just not as co-chair. If Chris is having difficulties with managing the IETF side of things by himself then I'm sure we can find someone else to fill in for you. In no way am I implying you are doing a bad role now or in the past, just that your current association makes you ineligable for being co-chair. Cheers, Darren > Hi Darren, > > I don't know them well enough to comment. > Are you willing to write one or two drafts proposing these as possible > solutions so the WG can evaluate them as alternatives? > > David Harrington > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2006 6:14 AM > > To: Miao Fuyou > > Cc: 'David Harrington'; 'Rainer Gerhards'; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: Re: [Syslog] Secure transport alternatives > > > > Miao Fuyou wrote: > > > real "general" security mechanisms(except IPsec, but it is not > > > application-friendly). So, IMHO the primary criteria for > > selection is: is it > > > convenient for the application to invoke the security > > service provided by > > > the security protocol? > > > > That to me sounds like GSSAPI or SASL. > > > > Any reason these aren't being considered ? > > > > -- > > Darren J Moffat > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Syslog mailing list > Syslog@lists.ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog > > _______________________________________________ Syslog mailing list Syslog@lists.ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/syslog
