On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 7:54 PM, TSG <[email protected]> wrote:

> Lawrence Rosen wrote:
>
> Because Larry - many of those here owe their ongoing $$$ livelihood to the
> lie the IETF has become. And so what you are suggesting is increasing the
> rolls of the unemployed by adding these individuals who's whole existence is
> the IETF. Its also these people in my opinion that make the IETF the
> laughingstock its become as you so rights notice that RFC's and the process
> for creating standards has degraded into a model where there really is no
> standard.


I agree.  I also remember over the years that many voices warned this was
coming.  I heard them.  Did anyone else?

cheers
joe baptista



>
>
> Just my two cents
>
> Todd Glassey
>
>>
>> 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 <
>> http://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
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>


-- 
Joe Baptista
www.publicroot.org
PublicRoot Consortium
----------------------------------------------------------------
The future of the Internet is Open, Transparent, Inclusive, Representative &
Accountable to the Internet community @large.
----------------------------------------------------------------
 Office: +1 (360) 526-6077 (extension 052)
    Fax: +1 (509) 479-0084
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Reply via email to