<html dir="ltr">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<style id="owaParaStyle" type="text/css">P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;}</style>
</head>
<body ocsi="0" fpstyle="1">
<div style="direction: ltr;font-family: Tahoma;color: #000000;font-size: 10pt;">
<hr tabindex="-1">
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg"><font color="#000000" face="Tahoma" size="2"><b><br>
I will have more to say...another day since it's late for me.<br>
<br>
But re IETF, this is very important for folks to understand...as Avria said:<br>
<br>
</b></font><font size="2">If accountability means taking responsibility for what has been done, I think that the IETF practice of taking three steps before deeming something a standard is part of their accountability story. First they code and prove that something
works before making it a proposed standard, then they test in the real world on the real Internet and fix it and call it a draft standard, and only when it becomes fully functional and mainstream in the world does it become a full standard. There are only
66 or so full standards. They stand by their work, publish fixes, take responsibility for problems that occur in the network with their standards, improve, republish and monitor. They take responsibly in a very public way, certainly large part of accountability.
If their stuff was not worth using, now one would use it and we would have a world full of 7 layer OSI protocol based equipment.</font><br>
<font color="#000000" face="Tahoma" size="2"><b><br>
The IETF has kept the fragile net of nets up for decades. Not a perfect org, but consider the alternative.<br>
<br>
A model such as IETF's and the IGC in which individual volunteers voluntarily assume responsibility has its share of problems...but for net specs, it's worked well. Not perfect but ok for IGC too. Extending that further versus alternate models into Internet
governance/enhance cooperation...I will comment more on in next post, tomorrow.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
From:</b> sama.digitalpolicy@gmail.com [sama.digitalpolicy@gmail.com] on behalf of Andrea Glorioso [andrea@digitalpolicy.it]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, May 23, 2012 9:54 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> governance@lists.igcaucus.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: IETF WAS Re: [governance] Enhanced Cooperation (was Re: reality check on economics)<br>
</font><br>
</div>
<div></div>
<div><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 3:28 PM, McTim <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dogwallah@gmail.com" target="_blank">dogwallah@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 12:46 AM, Andrea Glorioso<br>
<<a href="mailto:andrea@digitalpolicy.it" target="_blank">andrea@digitalpolicy.it</a>> wrote:<br>
> It seems to me Ian provided at least two metrics (solution of basic<br>
> architectural issues such as security and identity,<br>
<br>
</div>
Are you sure these are architecture issues?<br>
</blockquote>
<div> <br>
I am sure of very few things, but security and identity do seem to me to be strictly linked to the architecture of an inter-networking system. I imagine some people may argue that these are matters for end-points, which (for some) are not part of the architecture.
But I'd love to hear your views on the matter.<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
> and adoption of IPv6)<br>
<br>
Why would adoption be a metric of success of a standards body? I<br>
would think the metric would be the standard itself!<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
</font></span></blockquote>
<div><br>
What's the use of a standards-making body if nobody uses those standards? <br>
<br>
And, to make the parallel between the IETF and public policy making bodies that some people have proposed (not sure you are actually proposing it) would a public authority be judged on the beauty, elegance, etc of the legislation it produces or on the fact
that such legislation is actually used/respected and it achieves the objectives it is supposed to achieve?<br>
<br>
Best,<br>
<br>
Andrea<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
--<br>
I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. Keep it in mind.<br>
Twitter: @andreaglorioso<br>
Facebook: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso" target="_blank">https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso</a><br>
LinkedIn: <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro" target="_blank">
http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>