On 20 Jun 2001 at 15:21 -0400, Lee Rafalow apparently wrote:
My point was simply that if the IETF does not take on the significant
protocol issues facing the distribution of web services (in this case to the
edge servers), the work will be done elsewhere. This should be a conscious
choice and the OPES charter decision is clearly related to that larger
decision. I liked the Hume quote in Adam's message trailer: "It is seldom
that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." With much less import, the
same can be said for technical authority. I'm not trying to encourage any
turf battles; I'm just trying to point out that the IETF expertise in
scalable networking solutions is valued but could be eroded in practice by
what I believe would be an inappropriately rigid application of principles.
Note parallels in the discussion we had over what should be in-scope for
the Sub-IP Area.
The arguments that bring us to accept sub-IP work in the IETF are
principally that
· The work depends on IP expertise, which is here,
· That it is critical to the development of the IP infrastructure, and
· That it directly or indirectly affects operations or routing at the IP
layer.
The bullet we haven't reached consensus on is #2.