Hannes, Let me try a different tack: 1) Is this document intended to change the way that the IETF interacts with other SDOs? 2) What is the document's marginal utility? I.e., what changes if it is published? 3) Is there a plan of which this document is a part or is it simply a 'one-off'? 4) What is the relationship between this document and the mission of the ISOC, which, as I understand it, is to promote the open development, evolution, and use of the Internet? Thanks, John Sent from my iPhone > -----Original Message----- > From: Hannes Tschofenig [mailto:hannes.tschofenig@xxxxxxx] > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 7:33 AM > To: John E Drake > Cc: Hannes Tschofenig; Brian E Carpenter; Eliot Lear; iab@xxxxxxx; > ietf@xxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Affirmation of the Modern Global Standards Paradigm > > Hi John, > > On Aug 15, 2012, at 3:41 PM, John E Drake wrote: > > > JD: To what purpose? As an aside, I get the 'feel-good' aspect, but > is there anything more? > > I like the term - IAB documents as 'feel-good' publications. > > The IAB publishes a variety of different documents. Some of them are > formal communication interactions with other organizations and others > are documenting topics that could be of interest to the IETF community > or even beyond. These documents are not enforceable in a legal sense > (which is good). > > The content of this specific document did not surprise you and, as a > regular IETF participant, it shouldn't. You look at the list of > principles and they sound familiar - they make sense (at least to most > of us, as folks noted in this discussion thread). The 'Openness', for > example, is in my view extremely important since it allows relevant > stakeholders to participate: Think about how low the barrier is to > participate in the IETF. If you believe that the process has any impact > on the quality of the specifications then the principles listed in the > document may resonate with you. > > Many may consider these principles as so obvious that they are not > worthwhile to write down. Unfortunately, they are not as obvious as one > might think. There are other ways to do standardization and, as we have > seen in the discussions on this list, some would like to change the > rules of the game. I believe that this will have negative consequences > for the Internet eco-system and for the speed of innovation we had > gotten so used to. > > Whether this document can prevent bad things from happening is of > course a separate story but it, at least, captures the views of a list > of organizations active in Internet standardization. > > I hope that this makes sense to you. > > Ciao > Hannes > >