|
Hi, At its core, the value of the IETF is technical. We must always make the best technical standards we can possibly make, adhering to the values of rough consensus and running code. Everything else is secondary or nobody (government or otherwise) will want to implement what we develop. It's easy to lose sight of this in this conversation. It's an advantage we have over organizations who vote by country, and we will always have it so long as such votes are allowed and where the majority of expertise is found in a minority of countries, or where the voice of expertise is silenced through "representation". Because of this approach, what happened at WCIT and at WTSA is likely to harm developing countries more than anyone else, and that is truly unfortunate. And so what do we need to do?
The other thing we need to understand is that the IETF doesn't
live without friends or in a vacuum. The RIRs, NOGs, other
standards bodies, and ISOC all are working at many different
levels, as are vendors. If WCIT shows anything, it is that these
organizations are being listened to, at least by many in the
developed world. Why? Because over 2.5 billion people are
connected, thanks to the collaboration of these and other
organizations. That's moral authority that should not be
underestimated. Nor should it be taken for granted. See (1)
above. And we also shouldn't try to boil the ocean by ourselves
or it will surely impact (1) above. Can we do a better job on outreach to governments? Yes. I'd
even venture to say that the IETF should be held – from time to
time – in a developing country, so that people can more clearly
see who we are and what we do. But not too often, lest it
interfere with (1) above. If we keep building the best stuff,
they will continue to come, even if there are bumps along the
road. Eliot |