On Mon, Sep 12, 2022 at 12:23 PM Timothy Mcsweeney <tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 09/10/2022 11:06 PM EDT Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> That was one of the reasons I helped set up a rival standards organization
> to IETF and was then involved in helping a second standards organization
> establish itself as a rival to that one.
Kind of amazing that you would be here asking for a favor after doing such a thing. In my circles, loyalty is still a thing.
Numerous studies show that institutions run into difficulties trying to expand beyond about 500-1500 people. IETF was above the upper end of that scale when we started W3C and W3C had expanded beyond that when we converted an SGML organization into OASIS.
IETF turns away work all the time. There is no way that IETF could possibly handle all the work going through W3C as well as the core Internet work.
I am not here 'asking for favors' either. I am keeping the IETF community informed of the work that I am doing. One possibility is that the IETF will decide to adopt my work, but I am certainly not asking them to do so as a favor. The case I am making is that the technologies I have developed could further the interests of the IETF members who work on them, the interests of their employers and the IETF as an institution.
People keep saying that they want a secure Internet. Over the past four years, I have developed a technology platform that makes end-to-end security practical by making management of the private key transparent to the end user. My technology is the first to secure data at rest by applying threshold cryptography.
If people want a secure Internet, they should look at Threshold cryptography. It is an incremental advance on public key that addresses the problems that have been holding us back.
If there is interest in doing this work in IETF process, it may be the right fit. But if not, I will go elsewhere. That is how I understand 'permissionless innovation'.
