On Fri, Dec 03, 2004 at 11:39:48AM -0500,
Chuck Mead <csm(_at_)redhat(_dot_)com> wrote
a message of 33 lines which said:
Should we just ignore the IETF?
Of all the things that PHB has said on the spf-discuss list this is the
biggest source of agreement I ever had with him. I have been having
discussions with a lot of "luminaries" about this and have concluded
that we really should go ahead and structure what we do to support an
independent standard.
No, no, and no. Whatever the weaknesses of the IETF, can you really
hope you'll be able to do something better, i.e. more open, more
efficient, and more widely accepted?
More open? *All* the other standard bodies are more *closed* than the
IETF, and it includes even the W3C. I'm not surprised that Verisign
prefer closed organizations like Oasis but I hope RedHat does not feel
the same.
More efficient? This challenge is an easier one :-} But many other
organizations fail to provide usable standards, too. IETF had MARID
but every other standard organization had its famous failures, too. If
the SPF "community" ask it (it didn't yet), the IETF can approve a RFC
for SPF in a few weeks. Who can be faster?
More widely accepted? This is the biggest problem with your
proposal. Why do people trust the IETF? And why would they trust your
new organization?