Johannes,
Maybe I can politely turn the tables here and solicit your help.
Why did you embark on LID, given the plethora out there....?
Well, I think it's a lot easier to justify creating a new technology,
than to justify that another standards body get involved in "2.0" of
something that has been worked on as "1.x" by a bunch of other
standards bodies who are alive and well.
It seems the core of your argument needs to be that we have a case of
discontinuous innovation here and that it would be unrealistic to
assume that one could successfully branch off a new standards project
from a standards effort that is nominally about the same subject, but
architecturally is completely different. (think "Innovator's
Dilemma") I think anybody who's ever worked in standards will
wholeheartedly agree, and so this argument works (at least for me),
in particular if it is brought up in context of LID, OpenID, YADIS,
Passel, SXIP and the like which are clearly discontinuous innovations.
It appears to me that such a project could be useful ... lots of
"if's" here of course because the proof is in the pudding ... so I'm
keen to learn more ;-)
Johannes Ernst
NetMesh Inc.
http://netmesh.info/jernst
_______________________________________________
dix mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dix
