> Without wishing to be nasty, I will point out that we have way more
> vendors than operators participating in our standards development.
Into the Future with the Internet Vendor Task Force
A very Curmudgeonly View
or
> From: Andrew Sullivan
>
> > The critical difference is that the IETF is an organization of
> > *buyers* rather than an organization of *sellers*.
>
> Without wishing to be nasty, I will point out that we have way more
> vendors than operators participating in our standards development.
That i
> From: Thierry Moreau
>
> Some sections of the IETF would be more vendor-heavy, e.g. the routing
> area. In those sections, only a serious economic study might tell to
> which extent the "patent pool" (wikipedia is your friend) excludes the
> permissionless inventor in those IETF sections.
M
On 05/15/2013 10:00 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Wed, 15 May 2013, Keith Moore wrote:
I'd like to see WGs be more pro-active about periodically summarizing
the salient points of their proposals, determining which parties
outside of the WG are likely to be affected, explicitly soliciting
i
On Wed, 15 May 2013, Keith Moore wrote:
I'd like to see WGs be more pro-active about periodically summarizing
the salient points of their proposals, determining which parties outside
of the WG are likely to be affected, explicitly soliciting input from
those parties, and explicitly considering
Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Tue, 14 May 2013, Dale R. Worley wrote:
The critical difference is that the IETF is an organization of
*buyers* rather than an organization of *sellers*.
Not that I have been active in the IETF that long (only a few years),
but IETF is pretty vendor-heavy.
So
> And yes, it's hard to participate without spending (significant) time. I
> don't know how else this could be done though. It's at least my opinion that
> if time is made available, the barrier of entry is probably the lowest of any
> similar organisation I can think of.
I like the article it
> And yes, it's hard to participate without spending (significant) time. I
> don't know how else this could be done though. It's at least my opinion that
> if time is made available, the barrier of entry is probably the lowest of any
> similar organisation I can think of.
That is my experience
On 05/15/2013 02:42 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
On Wed, 15 May 2013, Keith Moore wrote:
Yes, I'm aware that some people (including myself) have effectively
participated on occasion without doing either of the above. But I
think it's hard to effectively participate in IETF on a regular basis
On Wed, 15 May 2013, Keith Moore wrote:
Yes, I'm aware that some people (including myself) have effectively
participated on occasion without doing either of the above. But I think
it's hard to effectively participate in IETF on a regular basis without
a significant investment in both time and
On 05/15/2013 02:00 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
Otoh hand the whole point with IETF is that *nobody* is *excluded*, it
consists of all interested parties and the barrier of entry is really
low.
That's what many of us would like to believe. But IETF certainly
doesn't consist of all intereste
On Tue, 14 May 2013, Dale R. Worley wrote:
The critical difference is that the IETF is an organization of *buyers*
rather than an organization of *sellers*.
Not that I have been active in the IETF that long (only a few years), but
IETF is pretty vendor-heavy.
Otoh hand the whole point with
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 04:37:11PM -0400, Dale R. Worley wrote:
> The critical difference is that the IETF is an organization of
> *buyers* rather than an organization of *sellers*.
Without wishing to be nasty, I will point out that we have way more
vendors than operators participating in our sta
> From: Jari Arkko
>
> Just FYI that I wrote another article, this time on "permissionless
> innovation" and the role of open standards.
A nice summary!
No permit had to be applied [for], no new network had to be built,
and no commercial negotiation with other parties was needed when
Just FYI that I wrote another article, this time on "permissionless innovation"
and the role of open standards. We've talked about these topics earlier, but
this has been on my mind recently - I've been traveling in recent weeks and
talking about the roles of various organisations and styles of
15 matches
Mail list logo
