Behalf Of Brian E Carpenter
These communities may not even be SDOs - they can be operator
consortia,
vendor consortia, industry consortia, or Lord knows what.
Ah, but those we can simply treat as individual
contributions, because there is no reason to do otherwise.
For the cases where there is a major infrastructure change that needs to
be achieved I would like to see a more interactive process. At present
the development model is a bunch of boffins go out into a shed, build
something and then ask the customer if they like it.
This process has not really worked for IPv6 or DNSSEC and I don't think
it is likely to work for BGPSecurity either.
One problem here is that there is no way that any shed is ever going to
be big enough to fit in all the parties that might have a stake in the
outcome.
Rather than treating the inputs from other organizations as individual
contributions I would like to see groups that have major infrastructure
change have a process available for formally soliciting input from the
various consortia where the stakeholders whose participation is
essential tend to meet.
As with any focus group there can never be an expectation that the
eventual solution will meet all of the requirements, but even if it does
not people prefer to be asked than ignored.
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf