[rfc-i] Meaning of "IETF"

Joel M. Halpern jmh at joelhalpern.com
Fri Jul 1 07:32:04 PDT 2011

For our usual purposes, we have an agreed place to judge the agreement, 
the relevant email list.

For this larger community, have no idea what would constitute suitable 
consultation with the larger group.


On 7/1/2011 10:28 AM, Dave CROCKER wrote:
> On 7/1/2011 7:21 AM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
>> I have some concern with the wording being suggested here. (The
>> concept I agree
>> with.)
>> The "Internt community" in the first sentence includes more than just
>> the IETF
>> WGs, the IRTF, and even the Independent stream. it includes all the
>> folks who
>> make use of our RFCs, or whou could/should/would make use of them.
>> And I have trouble with mandating that the RSE consult with that
>> collection. As
>> I said earlier, it is somewhat strange to make the arbiter of policy,
>> and the
>> group to be consulted, a group that you can't find.
> How is that different from our usual construct of rough consensus in a
> non-membership environment?
> d/

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list