Did you read the BATV proposal by Dave Crocker?
<http://brandenburg.com/specifications/draft-crocker-marid-bat
v-00-06dc.html
Which has zero buy in from any party with any deployment influence.
Nope, I don't mean that proposal.
Before MARID my preference was to work on the specs in
OASIS which is
a much more professional outfit than the IETF and actually
has a track
record of succeeding with short timescale proposals. We don't need a
big imprimatur here, just some group that has an ISO
accreditation of
some form.
Are you talking about this group? http://www.oasis-open.org/
If so, then I understand that by "profesional" you mean
"corporate." They
charge $250/year for non voting membership and $1000/year for
non-profit
voting membership. I'll refrain from making comments about a
particular
organisation that help sink the MARID ship.
My preference would be to have the finances managed on the IETF
model and the process managed on the OASIS model, roberts rules
of order work pretty well.
But please take account of the fact that the IETF costs $650
per meeting to attend, at 3 meetings a year it costs my dept
considerably more to participate in IETF than it does for our
sponsoring membership of OASIS.
At this point I would not suggest OASIS. I think we have pretty
much done the work. We started with the buy in from all the
parties that make any difference on deployment. We have a draft
that provides each constituency with something that they can
accept.