But then the CCiTT and ITU-T were already heavily invested. The IETF has never had the same sway.
Lloyd Wood
lloyd.wood@xxxxxxxxxxx
I think 4G/5G/6G required a lot of public commitment too.
On Monday, May 20, 2024, 12:23, Dave Crocker <dhc@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 5/10/2024 2:33 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
On 5/10/2024 10:54 AM, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
* Prior to accepting any Standards Track document for development, there must
be a commitment to implement the resulting proposed standard from at least
two independent parties, as recorded on a related IETF mailing list.Just realized this concern did not get attention:
Simply put this is a thoroughly unreasonable burden.
Companies don't work that way.
Companies do not make public, future commitments for implementing standards. And when there are attempts to get them to, they waffle and evade.
Also, I believe, the IETF has wisely never tried to impose this burden.
Again, if the goal is to limit this working group to only take on specifications that are already in use, then just say that. It's simpler, clearer, more direct and, frankly, more pragmatic.
Because that is the practical effect of what's in the charter.
d/
-- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net mast:@dcrocker@mastodon.social
