On Feb 19, 2011, at 11:30 AM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Keith Moore <[email protected]> > wrote: > On Feb 18, 2011, at 12:46 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > > > This protocol has established a legacy base, as in it is going to be a part > > of the infrastructure we have to work round for decades even if Apple > > abandon it tomorrow. > > > > It is now futile to attempt modification of the protocol except in limited > > ways that do not impact the legacy base. > > > > Therefore we need to have a description of the protocol as a standard used > > on the Internet. > > Does not follow. Having a description of the protocol, as it was deployed, > documented is usually a good idea. Having it as standard, not necessarily > so. There are a great many protocols which have "established a legacy base" > which are not suitable for standardization. > > Internet Standards are what run on the Internet.
Lots of things run on the Internet that are not standard. > The reason that I keep proposing process and document changes is because I > would like the IETF to be more effective in playing a leadership role in > Internet Standards making. Ideally, IETF's role is to provide advice that helps the Internet and Internet-based protocols work well. Merely blessing things that do not work well is not playing a leadership role. > The Web is bigger than one person or one organization. > > So expecting to control its growth or development is as futile for us as for > anyone else. Control has nothing to do with it. But if IETF doesn't fairly reliably give good advice, its reputation will decline and IETF will become less relevant. Keith
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
