To believe this, you must believe that large vendors
are unable to ship a
product until it has some sort of IETF rubber stamp.
Stephen,
It does increase the acceptance of a solution
specially when customers are concerned about
inter-operatability issues. It is more so in carrier
networks.
You must also believe
that this IETF rubber stamp is only available to
large vendors, and only
large vendors will benefit from it.
I didn't say that. I said RELATIVE benefit derived
(actual in terms of increased sales, or perceived in
terms of prestige and goodwill). We don't have fix
tax per person for all rich and poor even though
everyone uses the same federal/state services?. The
question is what are the alternatives way to better
fund IETF activities and control (controllable portion
of) rising costs?
Given that the IETF does not recognize organizations
at all, it is hard to
agree with this model. The process is specifically
designed to prevent this
from happening, and I think the current IDNA
argument shows that it's
difficult to railroad a WG with a bad idea.
Agreed - i didn't say that it is easy to push bad idea
through any working group. But it is easier to build a
momentum around for an idea if you have many people
coming from the same organisation simply because you
know them, and you work closely with them (though many
people will say the design of IPv6, and a lot of MPLS
work isn't a shining example of good work, but it is
not because of bad ideas, but rather too many good
ideas :-))
==bonney
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - live college hoops coverage
http://sports.yahoo.com/