At 07:05 AM 1/13/2010, Russ Housley wrote:
I see absolutely no good reason not to start the work and do
negotiations with other SDOs on the side.
That is thw way these joint bodies are usually formed (at least the
MPEG/ITU-T ones). The group(s) form, and begin their
work.(independently) In parallel the chairs and SDO management work out
the joint body organization. It is easiest if the discussions on joint
body organization begin as soon as possible.
My experience is different. When the IETF works with another SDO,
the final steps in approval are extremely painful. The IETF process
does not meld well with others, and the result is that getting the
exact same words published by both organizations is a near deadlock
experience. It has been done, but only because of heroic efforts by
chairs and editors. For this reason, I prefer a situation where one
SDO runs their own process and the result is submitted to partners
after the words are final. Of course, collaboration during the
development of the document is most welcome, but the process rules
of one SDO are governing the development.
Agreed. And now we are continuing to re-trace old steps repeatedly.
We had this discussion already before the Hiroshma BoF, and in the
Hiroshima BoF. We concluded that likely the most positive form of
collaboration we could have with the other SDO's on this topic was
for the IETF work to run it's course, -- while (a) inviting the
individuals and companies and experts from the other SDOs to
participate and contribute openly, and (b) liaising regularly on our
progress and inviting input -- publish it's first set of RFC's (and
remember, RFC's are documents that may be standards track, but new
work doesn't start as a standard, only a proposed standard, i.e. we
can revise them over time, or kill them later, if we so choose), then
work with other SDOs on modifications or joint promotion or whatever.
The key here is that the IETF first needs to run its own process so
that we know clearly what we want technically and business-wise, and
have an example of something we think fits the description, and we
document those in an RFC or two. Then we can more effectively engage
with other SDOs at a textual level. This is my take away from the
lessons learned to which Russ refers.
Hth,
Gregory
Russ
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf