It is clear from the statements being
made that the IETF has little institutional understanding of
the seriousness
with which the spam problem is now considered by the ISPs and
end users.
More like the press has little understanding of the IETF.
From what I've
read to date, that seems to be the norm.
If the IETF does not want to be organizing the response to spam then it
should just tell everyone and it will be left alone.
The press believes that the IETF is in charge of the Internet, the IETf has
not exactly tried to discourage this view.
Consensus does not mean that everyone gets a veto power on change. If the
proposers of SPF, caller ID etc. do not believe that they advance in this
forum they will choose another.
What the proponents of change want is an expedited process to agree on a
standard to solve a very urgent problem. They would also like the imprimatur
and endorsement that the IETF provides, although that is of dubious value if
it will take more than a year to obtain.
What I or anyone else in my position is looking for from a standards process
is a means to help generate the critical mass necessary to drive deployment,
the reason for a consensus process is to get buy in from the core
stakeholders. We are NOT looking for technical expertise, or a committee of
the great and the good to show how important they are by taking over a year
to read drafts.
Phill