The SPF community has prepared a strategy for getting adoption by the
masses, but is holding off on executing that strategy in deference to
the IETF.
On the face of it, this appears to be the most egregious megalomania. If
not a threat.
If the IETF decides that a deployment campaign encompassing
change management and industry coordination is outside its charter,
the SPF community will continue to run with the ball. If the IETF is
willing to provide driving leadership in an official capacity for the
adoption campaign, that would be ideal for everyone involved.
Assuming MARID continues to validate the work already done by SPF, are
there any organizational precedents for the IETF not just developing
but actively promulgating a standard? Or is adoption generally left
in the hands of fate?
MARID continues to validate work done by many people, on all the LMAP
proposals and elsewhere.
It seems that some SPF proponents believe that the primary use for this
group is to get endorsement for SPF. This may be a consequence of poor
perceived prospects for substantive levels of deployment otherwise. I'd be
concerned that even if this group "endorses" SPF by producing a
SPF-compliant MARID record, prospects for deployment will still be poor
(unless you have firm commitment from key players), which doesn't do you or
IETF much good.
I hate to throw in the prisoners dilemma, but I'm going to :-) We're
talking about something like a iterative spatialized PD, we can't quantify
the payoffs, the neighbour numbers (connectedness) are unknown but
variable, we know that the proportion of defectors (non-implementors) at
the outset is high. You solve it. I wouldn't know where to start.
Identifying, and getting support from, the key players seems to me to be a
good plan. Can IETF help you do this? Does the rich feature set of SPF
help? (Or would they be happier with something more "lightweight"?)
Otherwise, you can declare a flag day, but what if nobody comes?
Regards,
JK