It is really hard to keep management backing for a standards process that does not deliver standards. I know that there are some people in the IETF who would very much like to see the commercial entities banished. And to some extent that has happened, there is a reason that IBM and Microsoft put more resources into OASIS and W3C and I do not think it is because they have more influence there. We are also seeing fewer academics. I don't think that you want participation in IETF activities to be limited to the few people fortunate enough to have managers who understand the nature of the organization and a few individuals of private means. On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 8:30 PM, Loa Andersson <loa@xxxxx> wrote: > Adrian, > > I think both statements are true. > > I've seen operators putting almost any RFC in RFPs, (actually done > it myself) STD, DS, PS, Informational, Experimental, Historic and > April 1st. An RFC is an RFC is an RFC! > > On the other hand talking to folks active in other SDOs you very > often hear the "no standards" argument. > > Renaming without changing definitions should part of the job. > > /Loa > > > > Adrian Farrel wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >>> From the perspective of the world outside the IETF, this is already the >>> case. An RFC is an RFC is an RFC... >> >> I don't think this is a truth universally acknowledged. >> >> I have heard the IETF disparaged a number of times on account of "hardly >> having any standards". For example, a full Standard is equated by some >> people with an ITU-T Recommendation with the implication that a DS and PS >> are significantly inferior to a Recommendation. >> >> Whatever we might think of the value of this statement and the motives of >> the people who make it, it is clear that the names of the different levels >> of RFC are perceived outside the IETF. >> >> Over dinner this evening we wondered whether something as simple as >> looking again at the names of the stages in the three phase RFC process >> might serve to address both the perceptions and the motivations for >> progression. >> >> Cheers, >> Adrian >> _______________________________________________ >> Ietf mailing list >> Ietf@xxxxxxxx >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > > -- > > > Loa Andersson email: loa.andersson@xxxxxxxxxxxx > Sr Strategy and Standards Manager loa@xxxxx > Ericsson Inc phone: +46 10 717 52 13 > +46 767 72 92 13 > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > -- -- New Website: http://hallambaker.com/ View Quantum of Stupid podcasts, Tuesday and Thursday each week, http://quantumofstupid.com/ _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf