Larry,
I have to apologize in advance for even posting this followup, but...
The IETF is pretty clear that there are different kinds of RFCs, down to the
level of April Fools Day RFCs,
The world outside the IETF is not, and
We don't seem to worry about that disconnect in the IETF.
At the end of the day, we are who we are. That might change, but won't change
based on posting to this mailing list.
Spencer
----- Original Message -----
From: Lawrence Rosen
To: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2009 2:22 PM
Subject: Does being an RFC mean anything?
The recent threads about draft-housley-tls-authz have taught me something I
didn't know about IETF, and I don't like what I've learned.
There are, it appears, many types of IETF RFCs, some which are intended to be
called "Internet standards" and others which bear other embedded labels and
descriptions in their boilerplate text that are merely "experimental" or
"informational" or perhaps simply "proposed standard". One contributor here
described the RFC series as "a repository of technical information [that] will
be around when I am no longer around."
The world is now full of standards organizations that treat their works as
more significant than merely "technical information." Why do we need IETF for
that purpose? If all we need is a repository of technical information, let's
just ask Google and Yahoo to build it for us. Maybe our Internet standards
should instead be created in an organized body that pays serious attention to
the ability of the wide world to implement those standards without patent
encumbrances.
But even if IETF isn't willing to amend its patent policy that far-and most
SDOs still aren't, unfortunately-at the very least we should take our work
seriously. When someone proposes a serious RFC, we should demand that the water
around that RFC be swept for mines-especially *disclosed* patent mines that any
serious sailor would want to understand first.
If IETF isn't willing to be that serious, maybe we should recommend that our
work go to standards organizations that do care? As far as my time to volunteer
for a better Internet, there are far better ways to do it than listening here
to proposals that are merely "technical information." At the very least,
separate that into a different list than IETF.org so I know what to ignore!
By the way, many of the same companies and individuals who are involved here
in IETF are also active participants in W3C, OASIS, and the new Open Web
Foundation, all of which organizations pay more attention to patents and the
concept of "open standards" than what IETF seems to be doing here. So let's not
be disingenuous, please. Almost everyone here has previous experience doing
this the right way.
/Larry
Lawrence Rosen
Rosenlaw & Einschlag, a technology law firm (www.rosenlaw.com)
3001 King Ranch Road, Ukiah, CA 95482
707-485-1242 * cell: 707-478-8932 * fax: 707-485-1243
Skype: LawrenceRosen
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf