IESG proposed statement on the IETF mission

[Harald Tveit Alvestrand]

--On 15. oktober 2003 12:50 -0300 Michael Richardson 
<mcr at sandelman.ottawa.on.ca> wrote:

>   The critical difference is whether or not multiple *operators* will have
> to communicate using the protocol.
>   So, in the case of controlling street lights, it is pretty unlikely that
> the Chicago Municipal Street-Light Control Network (CMSLCN) will have to
> control lights located in New York City. As long as all of the equipement
> in the CMSLCN.net are owned by CMSLCN.net, then CMSLCN is in a position
> to:     1) dictate to their vendor what the standard will be.
>     2) provision the equipment (in advance) such that things interoperate
>     3) buy from whatever vendor pleases it most.
>
>   As soon as the lights in NYC (owned, provisioned and bought by NYC)
> have to operate with the light controller in Chicago, then we need an
> IETF standard.

Why an IETF standard, and not a Traffic Light Controllers Forum standard?