W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-discuss@w3.org > November 2001

Re: Requirements for reliable message delivery

From: Patrik Fältström <paf@cisco.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 19:52:53 +0100
To: Jim Gettys <jg@pa.dec.com>, "Marshall T. Rose" <mrose+mtr.netnews@dbc.mtview.ca.us>
cc: Jim Gettys <jg@pa.dec.com>, Discuss Apps <discuss@apps.ietf.org>, Marshall Rose <mrose@dbc.mtview.ca.us>
Message-ID: <6214303.1006977173@localhost>
--On 01-11-28 10.31 -0800 Jim Gettys <jg@pa.dec.com> wrote:

> So, by inaction, the IETF is likely condemned to the kludge tower growing
> ever higher....  Someday it will fall over.  Or maybe it is job security
> for us all??? :-)

There is another problem we have in the IETF, or two:

 - It is very hard to start from scratch with anything today. One have to
   come to the IETF with something which is so baked that it is almost
   ready to eat. Look at the IDN discussions where we are today.
   Completely useless discussions, to be honest. A correct design
   should have been made before the discussion started.

 - Coming up with something which is completely new is hard. Many people
   have to implement it, write code, etc etc. Incremental changes are
   easier. Much easier. This is why I feel so many people get "ok" from
   their companies to spend time using HTTP or whatever else which exists.
   "It exists" and they don't have to write things from the beginning
   again.

I might be an optimistic person (I have to I guess :-) but I hope that
people designing new things still see a value using IETF for review of new
things.

Generally, I do agree in your view that IETF doesn't understand needs from
Applications. And I don't know what to do about it.

I am listening.

   paf
Received on Wednesday, 28 November 2001 13:54:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 23 March 2006 20:11:29 GMT