At 11:57 AM 6/25/2001, Jeffrey Altman wrote:
>There is no reason for a protocol whose authors plan to seek IETF
>backing to be developed outside the IETF.
Unless some vocal people have told them that
- their efforts are misguided
- they're stupid and incapable of coming up with anything good
- "Because I can't see a use for it, it shouldn't be done"
- "Because it could possibly be misused, it shouldn't be done"
- "Because I didn't think of it first, it shouldn't be done"
(no one actually says this, however...
- "Because I don't have time to participate, it shouldn't be done" (ditto)
... or any of a thousand other things...
If enough crap is thrown in the way of people who want to accomplish
things, eventually, they will find another way. Of course, what will happen
if the OPES folks do as some suggest and develop it outside of the IETF
(because they're frustrated with responses like have been exploding on here
the last few days) and then try to bring it in for approval, then everyone
is going to explode and say "Why wasn't this work done in the context of
the IETF?"
Hmmm... Guess you just can't win
Another disturbing observation... in the past, every organization that
really was a meritocracy (as I would call it) that I have been associated
with, simply consisted of good people doing good work, without
consideration for the "rules of participating" or "keeping the riff-raff
out", etc. There was no discussion of it being a meritocracy, it just was.
As soon as it got to the point where people were calling it a meritocracy,
and debating rules about what was "meritous" enough to warrant "admission"
and who owned what piece of technological ground, it was the beginning of
the end. Soon, the people who were doing the good work went elsewhere where
they could once again do good work, unencumbered by the "meritocracy".
Stephen
Stephen McHenry
VP, Engineering/CTO
Cacheware, Inc.
655 Campbell Technology Pkwy, Suite 150
Campbell, CA 95008
Ph: (408) 540-1310
Fax: (408) 540-1305
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.cacheware.com
