Agreed with multiple caveats. The "internet" world (whatever that is)
is a diverse, autonomous, amorphous, and constantly evolving mesh of
networks, devices, applications, users, and standards activities. There
are an enormous array of internet protocols produced in many different
venues, including proprietary instantiations. Ultimately, providers,
users, and regulatory authorities shape which protocols are employed in
different contexts. What some IETF participants view as "broken," are
frequently viewed by others as "fixed and updated."
All of these venues are just places to hang out by generally like-minded
people oblivious to what is what occurring outside the playground, and
there are a lots of them to choose from. The IETF's value among the
collection has always been its ability to engage people on the fringe
with new ideas - which is why DARPA started it up and funded it for
decades, and why participation continues.
--tony
On Jan 5, 2023, at 11:00 AM, Tony Rutkowski
<trutkowski.netmagic@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
All of this may explain the lack of "boots on the ground" in the IETF. The boots have moved to other more pragmatic, real-world ground. :-)
The IETF still has change control over key Internet protocols. Which
means that large swaths of the Internet rely on insecure / outdated /
broken protocols.
And that means those protocols won't be updated, even if some efforts
have moved elsewhere.
Alan DeKok.
