Sorry, I thought you were aiming toward the age old "this
working group has existed too long" debate. On the
usefulness question, I actually think an experienced AD is
going to know what works and what doesn't, more so than an
inexperienced one. But the AD doesn't invent the ideas. So...
It is possible to be too experienced - as was demonstrated during
certain very extended incumbencies.
The particular behavior I was refering to was 'gilding the turd'. Five
or six years ago there was rather a lot of effort going into activities
that made minor improvements to specs that were completely undeployable.
The Internet faces two rather serious problems. The Internet is not
secure and we are running out of address space faster than IPv6
deployment is proceeding.
"Imminent Death of the Net Predicted"(r)
Wake me when it happens. Economics will have its say here, IMHO.
Currently Internet crime is costing around a billion to ten billion
dollars a year. At what point do you feel that there is a crisis worthy
of your attention?
We really could use a version of DNSSEC that can be deployed.
Ummm... Physician, Heal Thyself?
If the WG had accepted my proposal the spec would have been deployed
three years ago. At this point we are still waiting for Moore's law to
make RAM cheaper.
Most new ADs tell a number of groups that they are on notice and must
complete or be shut down, these threats are followed through rather less
There is a particular type of deadlock that arises where a group has not
got a workable spec, refuses to consider the type of changes necessary
to make it workable and refuses to allow any other group to consider the
Ietf mailing list