On Nov 13, 2013, at 10:49 AM, Ole Troan <otroan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> is there a problem here, or should we just accept that sometimes the
> IETF will generate ten sets of publications solving more or less the
> same problem?
This has been a longstanding issue in the IETF (and its predecessors, I'd
have to check some of these dates) - going back to HEMS/SGMP, OSPF/IS-IS,
etc.
My long-standing personal position is that the IETF is pretty good at
_producing and vetting_ designs, but less good at _chosing_ from similar
alternatives. I think it's better if, when we can't agree, to let the users
decide which works best for them.
Yes, yes, I know, this is in some ways painful - resources get wasted on
duplicate efforts; some users wind up with investments in standards that
dead-end (think Betamax, etc); etc. But at the same time, making a choice can
produce lengthy, extensive painful politics and wrangling, too. So there are
down-sides both ways.
My bottom line: we're not infinitely smart, and have only limited
foresight. Some things you can only learn by trying things.
Noel