[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Reporter claiming SKIP...
>From: "William Allen Simpson" <bsimpson@morningstar.com>
> > > My original comments came because I was informed by a reporter that
> > > there were people from Sun going around claiming that SKIP was
> > > destined to be *the* standard for IP security and trying to bludgeon
> > [...]
> >
> >
> I can see where the reporter might have gotten the idea. Aziz's slides
> (in today's presentation) states:
>
> "There was overwhelming consensus for SKIP to become an IETF
> standards track RFC at the July '95 IETF meeting in Stockholm."
>
> No mention that it was a BOF. No mention that it wasn't the working
> group, or more importantly a steering group final decision.
>
> Bill.Simpson@um.cc.umich.edu
Bill,
Here are a few things you neglected to mention.
- This was not a press briefing. It was a private presentation to
a group of vendors, most (or probably all) of whom are IETF
participants, and had been to the meeting in question and knew
exactly what was being discussed. The press was not invited to
this presentation. Your implication that reporters might have
been present is misleading at best.
- Taking text from a presentation slide's bullet item, and then
blasting it for completeness is not appropriate. As anyone who
has given a presentation knows, a presentation bullet item is
more of a visual cue for the speaker, and not a legally complete
piece of text.
The fact that this was a BOF came up in the verbal discussion
when this slide was up, and no attempt was made to misrepresent any
information, as you are suggesting.
- The quoted text does *not* in any way imply that SKIP would
become *the* standard for IP security. As it stands, the text is
completely accurate.
- In this vein, you could take the text from the bullet item of
my last slide where it states: "SKIP reference sw will soon be
placed in the public domain" and blast it for not mentioning that
there will be 2 restrictions, i) a liability disclaimer and ii)
observance of US export control laws.
Gosh, a bullet item was not legally precise, by failing to mention
these two restrictions. Stricly speaking, the software would not
be public domain. Of course, these 2 restrictions were
mentioned verbally, when this slide was up, and presentation bullet
items rarely contain complete text on the points they are intended to
highlight.
Regards,
Ashar.