The IETF's problems

[todd glassey]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Keith Moore" <moore at cs.utk.edu>
To: "Iljitsch van Beijnum" <iljitsch at muada.com>
Cc: <problem-statement at alvestrand.no>; <moore at cs.utk.edu>
Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2003 10:51 AM
Subject: Re: The IETF's problems


> > > just because a government passes a law doesn't mean IETF should
> > > expend its energy to try to help them.
> >
> > There is a little more going on than just one government passing a
> > law.
>
> yes, there are lots of governments trying to conduct mass surveillance
> on people.  that still doesn't mean IETF should help them.

The IETF is not to stop them either. The IETF is a standards process not the
morality or ethics keeper of the Internet unless you and your sponsers want
to pay damage claims from the rest of us.

>
> > And it's certainly not about helping governments, it's about helping
> > service providers and smaller vendors.
>
> no, it's about not wasting IETF energy by investing it in areas where
> it can only do harm.

No its not. Its about people like you being able to say what is and is not
woked on. The only way to describe the effect herein is "restraint of trade"
and "tortuous interferance with the operations of a business" that is
dependant on the IETF's open and fair services.

>
> > Cisco is trying to do the
> > responsible thing here by coming to the IETF to standardize this
> > stuff.
>
> Cisco is trying to get IETF backing for an irresponsible activity.
> What Cisco does is its own business, but IETF shouldn't be goaded
> into supporting it just because Cisco does it - particuarly when
> nothing useful can come of it and when it is inconsistent with IETF's
> goals.

I agree with you here personally as far as Cisco's initiatives go, but I
also want to state that Cisco's initiatives have the same weight as all
others here and should be the same. So they like anyone else that completes
the process should be able to get a standard issued against their wares.

its up to the marketplace and not the IETF to determine what is and is not
the dominent player.

>
> > > now, can we please get back to the topic of this list?
> >
> > This is a prime example of the topic of this list: the IETF is unable
> > to determine what it should work on and what it shouldn't work on in a
> > satisfactory way.
>
> it's a prime example of why we shouldn't work on something just because
> large vendors want us to.

But your push back essentially allows you to state that the IETF can decided
what and what it does not want to work on and that likewise is a restraint
of trade development.

Todd

>