Interesting reading, but it doesn't really address the original post's idea. Setting some goals and a general vision is not prognostication. It's thinking about how you want things to be, rather than trying to guess what they'll be like. You might never get there, and that's ok. But it helps upholding values and principles, and guides new work. It's a bit like writing science fiction. I, for one, would propose leaving past grievances in the past and to look towards the future. Cheers! ~Carlos On 5/28/14, 1:54 PM, Joe Touch wrote: > > > On 5/28/2014 1:05 AM, Alessandro Vesely wrote: >> On Tue 27/May/2014 20:00:58 +0200 Joe Touch wrote: >>> On 5/26/2014 7:15 PM, Miles Fidelman wrote: >>>> At one time, NSF and the National Academy of Sciences used to publish >>>> "research agendas" for networking - when did this stop? >>> >>> It didn't, and all such reports (including 2020 visions) have had the >>> same amount of impact (lots of heat, but no light IMO). >>> >>> Unless the IETF is prepared to put up research money to back it up*, >>> making statements about the future of the Internet is unproductive >>> prognostication. >> >> Yet they spend some bucks on it: > > The *IETF* has not. > >> Moving towards a more robust, secure and agile Internet >> NSF announces $15 million in awards to develop, deploy and test future >> Internet architectures >> http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=131248&org=CISE&from=news > > The NSF and DARPA absolutely have. > > DARPA has been two-faced about it, though - on the one hand, repeatedly > celebrating the Internet as it's "poster" success story, on the other > hand undermining the entire concept of shepherding nascent ideas for the > 20+ years it took for the Internet to gain traction. Shame on anyone > from our community who attended one of these celebrations since Tether's > tenure there, IMO. > > Joe > >