[ntpwg] KoD 'backoff' BCP/direction

[TS Glassey]

Rob -
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rob Seaman" <seaman at noao.edu>
To: <ntpwg at ntp.org>
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2008 7:43 AM
Subject: Re: [ntpwg] KoD 'backoff' BCP/direction


> Let's jump back to the real issue.
>
> On Jun 1, 2008, at 10:35 AM, TS Glassey wrote:
>
>> TICTOC (the IETF's new Precision Time WG is even more clueless IMHO).
>
> Until the activities of NTPWG are finished, there is no basis to
> evaluate the performance of its successor.

I dont want or need to evaluate the NTP Successor - its hear already... 
NTPDate is it for end-users. The only people that need NTP Daemon's are 
people who need to have their remote value checked by some other station and 
we have done that with embedded peer type systems already.

> You could also pursue your
> goals outside the IETF bailiwick.

We are. But this group is as well which is where all of this convo on the 
KoD came from.

Cracks me up - you know from a legal standpoint there is no IP transfer 
between the participants of HACKERS and the participants of NTPWG, except 
that NTPWG appears to magically own the Engineering Consulting 
Workproduct/output of HACKERS so it can assign it to the IETF.

What a mess...

>
> The best and quickest way to move things forward is to wrap up the
> current business before this WG, not to attempt to introduce new
> requirements or features.

No Rob - the best way to move forward is to use a uniform set of development 
assignments (IP Rights) and their owners across the whole process. The 
NTP.ISC.ORG operations are not doing that now but can easily be setup to do 
so.

And BTW if you want to see if your organization supports that or your 
assertions or mine here, lets get your general counsel involved... As I 
recall Carrie-Nunes was the Assistant/Acting GC for you folks, is that still 
true?

>
> Rob Seaman
> NOAO
>
> _______________________________________________
> ntpwg mailing list
> ntpwg at lists.ntp.org
> https://lists.ntp.org/mailman/listinfo/ntpwg