Re: The IETF Mission

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> > Not all important ideas enter the working group process and emerge
> > as standards, and the fact that some working group chooses not to
> > "capture" an document does not make it necessarily unworthy of
> > preservation.  ...

> Another approach here is to allow for the creation of ad-hoc WGs. That
> would provide a cleaner path for tangential documents that don't fit
> ... 

Let's see if I've got all of this straight:

 - The IETF is working on a Dilbert Standard compliant Mission Statement.
  The Dilbert Mission Statement Standard requires foursquare support
  of all virtues and opposition to all vices, without unnecessary
  (read "any") limitations.

 - There are many wonderful ideas that are so awesome that if they were
  self-published, their publishers cannot be slashdotted and would
  never be indexed by Google.  To remedy this unfair lack of publishers
  and de facto censorship, the IETF will go into competition with the
  ACM, IEEE, etc. in both the refereed academic publish-or-perish
  business (e.g. CACM or *Transactions) and the random research notes
  business (SIGCOMM).

 - Salescritters, marketoons, and trade rag espurts find it inconvenient
  to utilize the IETF imprimatur by submitting I-Ds (possibly pushed
  to Informational) and then advertising compliance.  To fix this
  terrible shortcoming of the IETF Standards Process that hinders
  innovatation by Microsoft and other leading edge organizations, the
  new IETF Mission Statement will require that anyone who wants a WG
  can have one.

I think those are excellent proposals, although perhaps not for the
same reasons as other adovcates.  I've been complaining about nonsense
I-Ds and write-only RFCs for many years.  The most effective way to
relive the pressure for junk RFCs and nonsense IDs is to make IETF's
stamp of approval meaningless by giving it to anything and everything
that comes along.  Within a matter of at most a year or two, RFCs might
go back to what they were 20 years ago.

To solve any funding problems or overwork of the IESG,
http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/wg-dir.html will become an automated
index of links much like http://reshmeat.net/ and we'll do away with
Last Calls. 

Let's hurry up and advance or at least archive these IDs before they expire:

  draft-terrell-internet-protocol-t1-t2-ad-sp-06.pdf
  draft-terrell-iptx-dhcp-req-iptx-ip-add-spec-00.pdf
  draft-terrell-iptx-dns-req-iptx-ip-add-spec-03.pdf
  draft-terrell-iptx-spec-def-cidr-ach-net-descrip-01.pdf


Vernon  Schryver    vjs@xxxxxxxxxxxx


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]