At 04:26 PM 5/24/99 -0700, Karl Auerbach wrote:
>Even the IETF has evolved away from those halcyon days ... In the old
Evolution of a working system is one thing. That's what we did with the
IETF. That's what some of us tried to do with IANA. That is not, however,
what is happening here.
There is a very big difference between evolution and starting from whole
cloth. The former attends to refinement. The latter is a blind
experiment. That's what we are doing here. Do not confuse the
differential risks.
>As far as I see it, the only harm in taking time to think and to build
>appropriate structures is that we are paying NSI $35/year as opposed to
>paying some unknown other entity some unknown other amount.
Yes, it is easy to take that simplistic a view. However...
Do you think that the Wall street evaluation of NSI is just about their
short-term advantage?
Now why is it that THEY think there is long-term, strategic advantage being
gained by them, but YOU don't? Do you really have that much experience in
evaluating market forces?
>But it is a little, small harm when compared to the much greater harm of
>precipitous adoption of a worldwide regime that vastly extends
You would not be behaving as you are if you thought the harm would be
large. So it's not all that meaningful that you have an explanation to
your position.
This does not, unfortunately, mean that your assessment is correct.
d/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dave Crocker Tel: +1 408 246 8253
Brandenburg Consulting Fax: +1 408 273 6464
675 Spruce Drive <http://www.brandenburg.com>
Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
