Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2007 18:58:34 -0400
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Dean Anderson <dean@av8.com>, Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
Cc: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, Ted Hardie <hardie@qualcomm.com>,
Steven M. Bellovin <smb@cs.columbia.edu>, Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz@cmu.edu>,
Spencer Dawkins <spencer@mcsr-labs.org>, Scott W Brim <swb@employees.org>,
Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, Brian E Carpenter <brc@zurich.ibm.com>, iesg@ietf.org,
"Contreras, Jorge" <Jorge.Contreras@wilmerhale.com>
Subject: Re: Withdrawal of Approval and Second Last Call: draft-housley-tls-authz-extns

(distribution aggressively trimmed and IETF list removed)

--On Friday, 06 April, 2007 18:32 -0400 Dean Anderson
<dean@av8.com> wrote:

>> At this time, I think it would be inappropriate for me to
>> share any mail archives I may have with you.
>
> The business records of a non-profit corporation may be
> examined by members of the non-profit. The email archives are
> such records. As a member, I'm entitled to the inspection of
> these records. Perhaps the IESG should discuss this with the
> ISOC/IETF/IETF Trust Attorney, Attorney Contreras. Hiding
> these records, to which I am entitled to view, seems
> questionable and less than transparent.

Dean,

The IETF is not a corporation. Even if it were a corporation,
discussions in the IESG about standardization decisions probably
don't fall into any reasonable definition of "business records".
And, regardless of whether or not it is a corporation or whether
that list was business records, the theory by which you claim to
be "a member" is certainly not obvious to me.

I am tempted to say "here we go again", but will instead
encourage you to stay focused on the IMO quite reasonable and
legitimate questions you asked several days ago rather than

slipping back into the personal accusations and demands based on
far-fetched legal theories that resulted in the PR action.

regards,

john