Hi Diane Cabell, you wrote on 7/5/99 11:24:46 PM:
>
>
>Gene Marsh wrote:
>
> By no means do I believe the IETF is a "perfect" model. It has plenty of
>flaws. However, it works and is open. ICANN could certainly learn worlds
>from their approach.
>
>[your turn!]
>
>Being an IETF doofus myself, I may be misremembering, but I thought that
>the IAB had to approve any protocol proposal before it was designated as a
>standard. And the IAB is not a popularly elected body, but a
>self-appointed one. (Were it not so late, I'd check that out before making
>such an outrageous allegation.) It was the original model for ICANN until
>the People demanded inclusion of the unwashed At-large Membership. Am I
>way off that mark?
>
>'Night, guys.
>dc
>
>
>
I don't think you are WAY off the mark... maybe just a bit off.
The questions are:
1) Is IAB approval required for acceptance of an RFC? (I believe so).
2) Does IAB approval (and, therefore, RFC standard status) mandate
acceptance by the Internet community and product providers? (I think
not... how many RFC's have NOT been implemented)
3) Must there be an RFC BEFORE a particular methodology is adopted? (How
about PPTP?)
The IETF provides a level of coordination, investigation and
recommendation, NOT absolute mandate and control. This is a fine line,
which ICANN appears to desire to cross.
Gene...
+++++++++++++++++++++
I'm very happy @.HOME(sm)
Gene Marsh
president, anycastNET Incorporated
