Good points Brian;-)...
One of the problems facing the IETF is that it has grown a very tough
hide (protective skin) like any good living cell does, to protect
itself from
harmful seeming outside interferences. It even has an immune system
that can react to deal with (and discard) some internal
interferences. In short, the IETF is a living organism and it
behaves accordingly.
Another is that IETF acts in many ways as though it is the only legitimate
user of its well founded standards development methodologies, and so it
might be seen as a living example of the well known KazzzWump! Bird, which
flies in circles of monotonic decreasing radius until...
So, may I respectfully suggest that IETF should encourage some people to go
elsewhere and use the IETF principles and methods to work on development
of new protocols that may not fit nicely inside the IETF.
There is no law I can think of that says that the only good protocols
are those that are created whole within the IETF processes. I can
name some that came from outside, such as POP3, which had a bit of a
rough go at displacing the more formally developed versions developed
within the IETF structures;-)...
Maybe in the case of OPES, the proponents should first do the
required research and prototype code production that tends to precede
good IETF results. Then,
if the results are suitable, they can bring their work into the IETF.
There should be no negative repercussions from an IETF decision that
some work is not yet ripe enough to occupy scarce space at IETF
meetings. Or from beginning work outside the IETF confines.
Especially if the work proceeds with use of IETF WG principals,
without commencing with the blessings of the IESG;-).
Cheers...\Stef
At 16:51 -0700 24/06/01, Brian Lloyd wrote:
Neither "consensus" nor "democracy" by themselves produce good work.
It is possible for the overwhelming majority (consensus) or bare
majority (democracy) to choose the mediocre over the good. At least
with consensus a few can have a more significant effect.
So, as I see it, it is the few rather than the many, who do the good
work. TCP works as well as it does because of the work of handful
of people, not the democracy of the majority or the consensus of the
population of the IETF.
The only advantage the majority of the IETF has is that in "the
olden days" the majority was involved in the day-to-day construction
of networks and were capable enough to recognize really good work.
Sadly, today I don't believe this is true and the current work of
the IETF supports this supposition in my own mind. (YMMV)
So, the IETF is a victim of its own success. Many who did the
original good work have fallen by the wayside for whatever reason.
Some are still here and raising their voices periodically but,
sadly, many are missing and those who remain are absorbed by the
process and not contributing new good work.
I miss the old IETF and would like to see something like that
organization continue. But most of my children have grown up and
moved away too. I guess life moves on, people and organizations
die, and those of us left have to live with it.
Brian Lloyd
brian(_at_)lloyd(_dot_)com
+1.530.676.1113 - voice
+1.360.838.9669 - fax