Please take me off this string.
*Julia*
-----Original Message-----
From: John W Noerenberg II [mailto:jwn2(_at_)qualcomm(_dot_)com]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 1:55 PM
To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: What is at stake?
At 8:23 AM -0800 1/24/02, Dave Crocker wrote:
Conformance discussions like the current one have been regular
fodder for Internet mailing lists for, perhaps, 15 years. They crop
up every couple of years. The group "script" for the discussion is
highly consistent.
As a consequence, citing the current occurrence as being for new
reasons is entirely unfounded.
And wrong.
At least one other membership organization that develops
telecommunication protocols does not impose any overt sanctions
against those members who fail to comply (3GPP2).
It is a practical impossibility for ISOC (and by extension, the IETF)
to act as a protocol compliance judge.
But can a society have a rule of law, if there is no explicit cost to
the member who fails to conform? This is the essence of Ed's question.
Is it wrong for the IETF? In a practical sense, yes. Is this a
question which applies to the IETF or to ISOC? To ask this a
different way, does the IETF and its protocols constitute a society?
(Looking up the etymology of society, its root is also found in the
word "persecute".)
best,
--
john noerenberg
jwn2(_at_)qualcomm(_dot_)com
----------------------------------------------------------------------
While the belief we have found the Answer can separate us
and make us forget our humanity, it is the seeking that continues
to bring us together, the makes and keeps us human.
-- Daniel J. Boorstin, "The Seekers", 1998
----------------------------------------------------------------------