ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: IESG proposed statement on the IETF mission

2003-10-24 10:02:58
Hi Harald,

I'm going to pick on one statement, which other have as well.

It is important that this is "For the Internet,"  and does not include 
everything that happens to use IP.  IP is being used in a myriad of 
real-world applications, such as controlling street lights, but the 
IETF does not standardize those applications.

I almost feel that this should just be dropped from the statement.  My
reasons being that I have been told by the IESG about protocol extensibility
is that the IETF wants to have a tighter control over protocol 
extensibility, even for extensions thought to be for limited use
or specific networks (for example, cellular networks).  The reason
being is that once something is out there, it often starts to be used
in ways which were not originally planned or used outside of its 
original 'limited use' plans.  Therefore, in order to ensure proper
protocol behavior & interoperability, the IESG wants to manage
extensibility.  This has been very true in SIP & Diameter, for example.

On the other hand, we see a protocol like RADIUS, which the IETF
has never done a good job at working with or standardizing, being
developed in 4 or more SDOs, and not in a colaborative manner.  This
makes a big mess with the RADIUS spec, and RADIUS does seem like a
protocol that has a big effect on the Internet.

So, in summary, the IESG has shown not to follow the above paragraph,
sometimes even for good reasons.  I can't think of a way in which 
modify the paragraph to make it any better - because there will always
be examples of work that the IETF choses to standardize (or not)
which will violate that part of the mission.  Perhaps moving the 
'for the internet to the previous paragraph is what is needed.

 This leaves open the very interesting and difficult questions of
 how to measure quality, relevance, and timeliness.  The IETF
 has identified interoperability, security, scalability and 
 'for the Internet' as essential, but without attaching measurements 
 to those characteristics.

John