Carl Malamud wrote:
If it is outside the scope of the IETF, why send the announcement
to the IETF list? :))
For several good reasons but mainly because the IETF list and WGs have
many individuals that have already gone through the learning curve needed
for collaborative work in standards work -- for example, that can reply in a
positive and up-beat way to this type of questions ;-)
We need to cope with diversity, and the old hands know this well, by being
liberal in what we accept while being conservative in what we require -- you
may note that my announcement email was short and that was, of course,
by design.
Also, because there are many individuals and companies in the IETF list
that may very well profit from a *specific* application area that can
immediately help them leverage from IETF work and experience -- which they
know much better than outsiders. For example, by helping the IVTA avoid to
reinvent the wheel (so to say -- who needs yet another file transfer protocol?).
Last, but not all, because the IETF process is exactly the art (science?) of
transferring to the public domain information which is, essentially, private
-- so that everyone can benefit, including vendors and users. Which
experience is by itself very useful to the young IVTA. In elections systems,
the experience is the traditional one of closed systems and this needs to
change in order to cope with the much higher stakes and risks of an eventual
Internet election.
Thanks for the opportunity to explain, in the best IETF tradition ;-) Iwrote
a bit, you ask ... I have then the opportunity and feel the need to explain
more.
Cheers,
Ed Gerck