ietf-mxcomp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: on per-user macros; and the IETF's role in a deployment campaign

2004-05-12 22:23:56

Jon-

I think you are making some assumptions about Meng's motives here. I interpreted the message from Meng a bit differently.

--Jon Kyme <jrk(_at_)merseymail(_dot_)com> wrote:

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.


SPF has a lot of momentum. I credit Meng's role as an evangelist and cheerleader more so than his work as a clever inventor. Remember that SPF has been in active use for a while, and MARID is just getting started.

I interpreted his statement to mean, there is a considerable overlap between SPF supporters and MARID supporters. Most SPF supporters want MARID to succeed. Most SPF supporters would rather see what MARID comes up with, and support it, than go forward with the original SPF plan and schedule.


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 didn't interpret this statement as pumping up SPF at the expense of any other proposals. I think it was meant as, hey, LMAP (of whatever flavor) is going to need an adoption strategy, not just a clever invention. If MARID group would like to "follow through" with an adoption strategy, not just a protocol, that's great. If that's a bit outside IETF's official purvue, then the things SPF was planned to do might still make sense, whether executed by IETF or some other group of concerned players.

SPF is probably 5% new, clever invention, 25% re-using great ideas had by others, and 70% marketing/evangelizing/discussing and doing the other hard work required to sell the LMAP concept. Meng will be the first to admit that SPF owes a lot to the other LMAP proposals that came before. The difference with SPF, in my opinion, is an active user community and a lot of hard work in discussing and refining.

I don't think anyone here is suggesting that MARID should rubber-stamp SPF and release it as-is, but neither should we dismiss SPF as irrelevant.


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?


I'm going to assume Meng's question was an honest one and not some attempt to bully people in adopting SPF. The question was about what MARID's adoption strategy might be, and who might work on it, and whether the folks already lined up to support SPF can help by throwing their support behind MARID.


--
Greg Connor <gconnor(_at_)nekodojo(_dot_)org>