At 18:27 08/03/2006, Carl Malamud wrote:
> It's been pointed out that the note to DoC was actually sent by
> the IAB and the IETF *Chair* not the IETF as whole.
>
> Obviously, the timescale of this RFI was too short for the
> IETF as a whole to debate a response. In fact, it was even too short
> for us to spot this nit.
Or to run a spell checker? It would have been better to not answer
instead of doing such a haphazard job. This was not an effective
document either in terms of process or substance.
Dear Carl,
the problem is that IETF and IAB do not want to accept the real world.
http://www.interfax.cn/showfeature.asp?aid=10717
And the real world is catching up. The USG is in a real world.
Their, our world.
What to do now?
- to ignore? possibly losing control on the IANA.
- to adapt in creating an IETF server? possibly creating a mess for
nothing if they do not sell? worse if they sell?
- lto ead in reviewing the architecture towards a fully distributed
network with concerted IANA, one a country? a language?
NOT an easy choice. But a choice which has to be made.
jfc
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf