Ron/*:
Which RFC defines "the common good of the Internet community" ?
Q: Are private/limited-domain networks part of the "Internet community" even if those networks have
no connectivity whatsoever to "The Internet" ?
Example: research mission networks (e.g.: NASA), power-grids, defense, manufacturing,
3/4/5G transport networks, many other IoT networks (trains, roads rivers,...),
all using MPLS/IP/TCP/* networks and many more IETF protocols than "The Internet"
If No, then why should leadership only care only about "The Internet" as opposed to the
larger output and applicability of the IETF work ?
If Yes, why then do we continue to call it _only_ "Internet community", when
in fact it is the IETF technologies community which is much larger (see above) ?
I have seen in the past few years from IETF leadership ongoing policy statements
that solely talked about "the Internet community" as ONLY to the "Internet proper"
community. Which is consistent, but IMHO only part of the IETF mission and part of leaderships job.
I have never in recent years heard or read any significant statements from IETF leadership emhasizing
how the good of the IETF community is much larger, broader and more diverse than just the
good of the Internet community. Even though it has repeatedly being pointed out and IETF contributors
even wrote RFCs about it. This worries me deeply.
I certainly would really appreciate if we would always use "IETF community"
(or some better term) UNLESS the topic discussed is really ONLY significant to the Internet
proper. And acknowledge the fact that the common good of the IETF commmunity is much
broader and more diverse than that of the Internet community.
Cheers
Toerless
On Thu, Oct 07, 2021 at 07:00:01PM +0000, Ron Bonica wrote:
> Christian,
>
> Keith has captured thee nuance of my comment. I really don't care where candidates come from, so long as they come to promote the common good of the Internet community and not their corporate interests.
>
> Ron
>
>
>
> Juniper Business Use Only
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, October 7, 2021 2:53 PM
> To: Christian Huitema <huitema@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Ron Bonica <rbonica@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: ietf@xxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Want to be on the IESG?
>
> [External Email. Be cautious of content]
>
>
> On 10/7/21 1:56 PM, Christian Huitema wrote:
>
> > Ron, I am not sure that I agree with you or Stewart here. We are
> > discussing the lack of candidates for leadership positions. If I look
> > at the roster of the IAB and IESG, I find plenty of members working
> > for those large companies that develop Internet technologies, and that
> > tells me that we are not exactly suffering from lack of participation
> > from big companies. In fact, if we loaded committees with even more
> > participation of these big companies, the complaint would not be that
> > they "do not invest" -- most probably, we would hear the opposite
> > complaint, that they invest too much.
>
> The question is, are those Big Companies "investing" or are they "exploiting"? Or some of each?
>
> Even though I think that's the question, I suspect we can't really answer that question definitively here, or maybe anywhere.
>
> But I'd love to see more I* candidates who are NOT from Big Companies.
> IETF needs more diversity in its leadership.
>
> Keith
>
--
---
tte@xxxxxxxxx
