[rfc-i] Now tell me how to communicate this as effectively in plaintext
hallam at gmail.com
Thu Apr 26 05:03:18 PDT 2012
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 5:35 AM, SM <sm at resistor.net> wrote:
> Hi Phillip,
> At 18:51 25-04-2012, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote:
>> I can't get the younger security engineers to work in IETF. They have
>> been turned off by the politics and the habit of the older generation
>> (i.e. folks like me) treading on their ideas.
> And by the IETF turning a blind eye when the usual folks post unpleasant
Quite. I get very upset when people try to argue by pulling rank on
someone 'if you understood the problem you would know why your
proposal is idiotic'. And then there is the old 'do we really think we
can do better than all those who have gone before us and failed to do
this in the past'.
When I started going to IETF fifteen years ago I was one of the
youngest present. By now about a third to half of the engineers should
be younger than me but in the security area at least I don't see very
> People already flock to non-SDO groups because of time to publication, how
> things get done, etc. This is more of an IETF problem than a RFC format
In the property business there is a saying 'a house sells on its frond
door'. If the house looks right on the outside it will sell even with
a bad surveyors report. If the front door is cheap or needs paint
people take that as a sign of the condition of the rest of the house.
The RFC format is the front door of the IETF and it is not very welcoming.
More information about the rfc-interest