IESG proposed statement on the IETF mission

Harald Tveit Alvestrand harald at alvestrand.no
Wed Oct 15 12:22:32 CEST 2003



--On 15. oktober 2003 09:56 +0100 graham.travers at bt.com wrote:

> Harald & Michael,
>
> It's *getting* worse !
>
> A few years ago one operator was prepared to fund about 20 individuals to
> participate in the IETF;  now that's reduced to about 5, with no
> guarantee that such a level will be sustained.
>
> This is not just about the downturn in the industry.  Real problems that
> operators have are not being addressed by the IETF.  If the IETF won't
> address my concerns, and if I have to go to the OMA to meet my
> requirements for application protocols, for example, that's where I'll go.
>
> You may say "That's fine".  OK, if that's the policy.  But, then, don't
> be surprised if it happens !

Graham,

thanks for your input!

it would be nice if you could name examples - since I'm not an operator and 
have rarely been on the forefront of the debates where you have been 
engaged, I don't have enough background to evaluate the experiences you're 
sharing.

In particular, I'm interested in hearing your requirements for applications 
protocols - both because I come from an applications background myself and 
believe the applications perspective to be important for the IETF, and 
because the proper boundary between "IETF work" and "application space 
work" is one of the long-simmering (long-festering?) debates that the IETF 
has never been able to come to resolution on.

                     Harald



More information about the Problem-statement mailing list