ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: IETF mission boundaries (Re: IESG proposed statement on the IETF mission )

2003-10-16 10:42:47
From: Eric Rosen <erosen(_at_)cisco(_dot_)com>

- "For the Internet" - only the stuff that is directly involved in making 
the Internet work is included in the IETF's scope. 

In other words, routing,  DNS, and Internet operations/management.  Adopting
this as  the IETF's mission  would be a  very radical change  indeed!  While
this particular  mission statement does seem  to reflect the  interests of a
certain notorious IESG member, let's not pretend that this has ever been the
limit of the IETF's mission.  The IETF has always been concerned with things
that make the Internet more useful,  and with things that expand the utility
of the IP protocol suite.  There's never been a time when "for the Internet"
was an accurate representation of the IETF's concerns.

That is wrong or at least a gross overstatement.

...
The  formulation   I  like  is  "Everything  that   needs  open,  documented
interoperability  and  runs  over  the  Internet  is  appropriate  for  IETF
standardization".  This is  much truer to the IETF's  current and historical
practice.  

That is also wrong or at least a gross overstatement.  There have been
many things that the IETF has chosen to step away from but that ran
and run over the Internet.  Some graphics standards come immediately
to my mind.

That doesn't  necessarily mean that  the IETF has to  standardize everything
that falls within  its mission.  For instance, a  particular area might fall
within the mission, but the IETF  might not have the expertise to tackle it.
A WG  in that area  could then be  rejected on the grounds  of "insufficient
expertise".  Such decisions  would have to be made  on a case-by-case basis.
Again, this is the way such decisions have always been made in the IETF.

No committee is ever able to limit itself on grounds of insufficient
expertise.  The people who join committees are predisposed to think
that they're sufficiently expert to deal with the subject matter.

Those graphics standards were kept out of the IETF not because the
working groups involved thought they didn't think they were experts,
but because the subject was out of scope for the IETF.  That most of
participants had no clues about computer graphics was incomprehensible
to most of the participants, and unfortunately irrelevant.


Vernon Schryver    vjs(_at_)rhyolite(_dot_)com



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>