2012/8/15 Marie-France Berny <mfberny@xxxxxxxxx>
Frankly we are not interested in this in here. We are concerned by network and network technology neutrality and best user interests. All this is to try to defensively balkanize the net. Please, let discuss our common bits, not the others' sins. Technical standards are not supposed to govern the world, democratically elected government are. We are not interested in protecting merchant interests and processes, but protocols and people.
My 3 cents.
MFBerny
Brian,
let be candid. The text of Bernard Adoba (Microsoft) is 100% in line with the Microsoft political line broadly publish under cover of Human Rights as the Global Network Initiative (http://www.globalnetworkinitiative.org/). Since the co-founder/influencer of GNI is Google (with Yahoo!) also with Microsoft a jewell member of ISOC, and that Russ Housley is security specialist involved in the IEEE, this text, its signatoree and first supporter were quickly identified in the political world as a confirmation that the IAB is (now the IETF is an affiliate of ISOC) politically and could therefore most probably technically be biaised in favor of the interest of the US industry dominants club.
Obviously, in political situations nothing is first degree. So, the question is why M$, Google, IBM, Yahoo!, Oracle etc. (the Unicode consortium, your company belongs to) are exposing the credibility of the IETF neutrality at this stage? There might be a global security oriented concern. There is certainly a concern regarding the multilinguistics of the Internet (leading to a multilatteral Internet). There is also the rogue attitude of ICANN to correct. There is also the lack of innovation due to the IETF slow-down. May be the Indian sub-continent oriented search of influence vs. China and Russia.
Frankly we are not interested in this in here. We are concerned by network and network technology neutrality and best user interests. All this is to try to defensively balkanize the net. Please, let discuss our common bits, not the others' sins. Technical standards are not supposed to govern the world, democratically elected government are. We are not interested in protecting merchant interests and processes, but protocols and people.
My 3 cents.
MFBerny
2012/8/15 Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx>
I take it that John's question is really *why* do these principles need toOn 15/08/2012 07:24, Eliot Lear wrote:
> John,
>
> On 8/15/12 12:03 AM, John E Drake wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Does this document actually have a purpose, and if so, what is it?
>>
>
> To me (and I speak only for me here), the purpose of this document is to
> articulate principles that have made the Internet a success. It is a
> means to invite others to subscribe to those same principles, and there
> are many standards organizations that do not. Customers and society can
> demand better, and this is an avenue for that.
be articulated in public. Perhaps the IAB should answer that, but my answer
is: because there is a real danger of some SDOs, including but not limited
to the ITU-T, breaking them for a variety of commercial or political reasons.
Brian