[Just replying to an existing post, if it's off-topic I can take it elsewhere if there's a more suitable forum]
Lloyd W <[email protected]> writes: >In my previous reply I mentioned the Note Well slides presented by WG meeting >chairs ... at pay-to-play meetings that exclude anyone who isn't generously funded by their employer to attend, which means around 97% of the people who participate in the IETF via mailing lists. >And then there's the usual boilerplate on internet-drafts, which IETF >participants - the people who are interested in developing ideas by using >internet-drafts - read: ... in the same way that people always read the full text of the license terms and conditions when installing software. > This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the > provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. ... on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard. I can well believe that most people would have little to no idea of what's in these docs, in the same way that they have no idea what's buried on page 27 of the license agreement they've just clicked past. >That's the second time you've brought up my former employer. Not sure what the relevance of the Cisco ref was, but as Cisco is by far the largest employer of IETF contributors for all of the last 20 years it seems valid to point out that their dominant position in the IETF standards process would lead to a somewhat atypical view of things. You're sampling from the far extreme of the bell curve, more useful results would be obtained from sampling from somewhere near the middle - pick a bunch of randoms off a mailing list and ask them to tell you, without looking it up, what's in BCP 78 and 79. Peter. _______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
