Posts by eliotlear@mastodon.social
 (DIR) Post #AlrWClwQ7vRQclkNG4 by eliotlear@mastodon.social
       2024-09-09T06:33:35Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @djb Dan,  you left out an important bit:  "This work will continue until the end of 2024."  Also, can you point to any decision you believe was incorrect?
       
 (DIR) Post #AlrWCnVYIn8bU1Bwem by eliotlear@mastodon.social
       2024-09-09T11:14:07Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @djb Theo was happy with the charter and said so here https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ssh/574wCUIl13fNeZK7Hn6RF4gtSR8/.  I am not going to enter the fray on the substance, but I think you owe those people an apology and a retraction.
       
 (DIR) Post #AlrWCod28SiSxVhQxM by eliotlear@mastodon.social
       2024-09-09T19:26:20Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @djb (1+3) He hasn't said "don't form a working group", and he hasn't objected to the charter.  Yes, he's annoyed by the conversation.  (2) Yes.  Deb has far less conflict than most industry participants, as she is retiring.  If the IESG applied the standard you suggest, no industry or government participant could serve, putting an end to the IETF and any industry-driven effort.  That would leave who exactly?
       
 (DIR) Post #AlrWMwM4GQI9okakhU by eliotlear@mastodon.social
       2024-09-10T06:28:25Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @djb Of *course* it's fabricated because my point is that or something like that is what one would say to object to the charter.  And as you should well know by now- you're not new at this- one AD doesn't make a decision on a charter, but rather it's the entire IESG.  That's another protection against CoI.  And even right now, you can comment to the entire IESG up until the 15th, after which it will be discussed on the 19th.  Details at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-sshm/ballot/.
       
 (DIR) Post #AlrWMxyOFQXYptWs4W by eliotlear@mastodon.social
       2024-09-10T12:53:51Z
       
       0 likes, 0 repeats
       
       @djb And again, the job can't get done if we require everyone to recuse on a large portion of decisions.  It's simply not possible.  Standards organizations are *riddled* with these sorts of conflicts.  That's the world in which we live.  What you can do is show where there is bad work.  Deb's job is to see that the process was followed and only at the end to spot issues that have not been properly addressed.