Re: sasl in beep or payload

Dave Crocker <[email protected]> Wed, 19 Dec 2001 08:36:12 -0800
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.sacred
Message-ID <[email protected]>
At 04:12 PM 12/19/2001 +0000, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>Well, I don't think so. A week ago I posted [1], and only Marshall (and
>now you) seemed to differ from that. If others do, then I'd have hoped
>they'd have spoken up by now.

Stephen,

The principle of having a chair declare a decision and wait for objections 
is well-established in the IETF.  However, to succeed, the use of the 
technique needs to have some basis in the recent history of the working 
group.

For example, it is not reasonable for a chair to literally ignore arguments 
they dislike and declare a decision that they DO like.

That you are both editor and chair, involving a matter of some controversy, 
is a point that needs to concern you a great deal.

As to the lack of response to your declaration, alternative explanations are:

1.  Post-IETF syndrome.

2.  Shock at the arbitrary (and frankly self-serving) declaration, 
resulting is a feeling that it is not worth commenting, since serious 
issues and serious points of view are going to be ignored by the chairs.

I'll also add that the reason I did not post anything earlier was that I 
sent my comments to the ADs, suggesting they fix the rather abherrent 
process that is clearly present in this working group.


> > In fact I seem to recall a presentation that argued for this re-use.
>
>Yes (and I liked your presentaion btw). There was also another one
>(Magnus') calling for a quite different approach.

You appear to be offering that as an excuse for literally ignoring the 
presentation you did not like.


> > Please note that if the working group takes the very strong AD guidance to
> > choose a single "transport" then there is no reason at all to create sasl
> > integration into the application, unless the working group chooses a
> > "transport" that does not already supply that functionality.
>
>I have some sympathy for this myself, but judging by the raised
>hands, the consensus amongst those who'd implement sacred was to
>include the sasl pdus in the payload.

I commend to you some study in survey research methodology and statistical 
sampling an analysis.

d/


----------
Dave Crocker  <mailto:[email protected]>
Brandenburg InternetWorking  <http://www.brandenburg.com>
tel +1.408.246.8253;  fax +1.408.273.6464