Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I have no ideas who Lars Eggert really is, but the quality of the rebuttal is very good. In such a critical field where non expert cannot understand what is going on and where we can only trust the experts, such a nice response on a very controversial and emotionally charged topic is very appreciable.



I thought so too first but then I read Trevor Perrin's response to Lars Eggert: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/cfrg/current/msg03778.h... and it seems quite clear that Eggert failed to consider a number of important aspects, just one example from Perrin's mail:

> So unlike the title "co-chair" might imply, and unlike in many other organizations, IRTF co-chairs are little more than group secretaries.

The chair is far more than a "group secretary". As RFC 2014 section 5.3 states:

""" The Research Group Chair is concerned with making forward progress in the areas under investigation, and has wide discretion in the conduct of Research Group business. [...] The Chair has ultimate responsibility for ensuring that a Research Group achieves forward progress. """


Funny .. I think he did a lousy job. I'd call this a snow job if I ever saw one. Moved the goalposts, changed the target, and arrived at a conclusion that is not going to be popular, in order to avoid 'controversy'.

Screw controversy. Are we going to be protected by the CFRG or not? At this point, it seems likely that we are not.

Goodbye, CFRG.


I agree ... it's well-reasoned and well-writen. But gently deciding to do nothing is also the easiest thing to do and gives you the option to back-pedal later saying "more information has come to light".




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: