4 ms·

The IETF strives to create the best technical solution for given specifications. That's its task. Where those specifications come from is a related but separate

The IETF strives to create the best technical solution for given specifications. That's its task. Where those specifications come from is a related but separate issue.

guerrilla 6y ago
> ‘Best' doesn't mean the choice that has the most companies supporting it; it’s the one that has the best technical arguments behind it. > If the IETF were to only decide upon technical merit, how would it balance these interests? > Over the years, these questions have become increasingly urgent, because it isn’t viable to make decisions that have political outcomes but explain them using only technical arguments. The article explains that that is necessary but not sufficient. It goes on to argue this with examples and explicit justifications. It even has an entire section dedicated to explaining why having it your way would not work. I'm not sure where your comment is coming from though. Who are you to decide how they will do their work? It seems they have decided for themselves and it's in conflict with what you want. Then we don't know why you want this because you haven't provided any reason, reference to authority or any other clues. From my perspective, the IETF and their standards don't exist in a vacuum and their actions have consequences, sometimes of an ethical nature. They seem to agree. It seems prudent that they come to a consensus on what their ethics are, document them and try to abide by them. It's just a case of having a consistent and open policy on a matter which can't be avoided. That is, they will do right or wrong whether they document their intention or not since their actions sometimes have such ethical consequences. Why stick one's head in the sand?
ergl 6y ago
Seems like IETF's mission statement disagrees with you: > The Internet isn't value-neutral, and neither is the IETF. We want the Internet to be useful for communities that share our commitment to openness and fairness. We embrace technical concepts such as decentralized control, edge-user empowerment and sharing of resources. https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3935 https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3935
- wyc 6y ago
  Also, the IETF has no formal membership roster or membership requirements, and all participants and managers are volunteers.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

The IETF strives to create the best technical solution for given specifications. That's its task. Where those specifications come from is a related but separate issue.

guerrilla 6y ago

> ‘Best' doesn't mean the choice that has the most companies supporting it; it’s the one that has the best technical arguments behind it. > If the IETF were to only decide upon technical merit, how would it balance these interests? > Over the years, these questions have become increasingly urgent, because it isn’t viable to make decisions that have political outcomes but explain them using only technical arguments. The article explains that that is necessary but not sufficient. It goes on to argue this with examples and explicit justifications. It even has an entire section dedicated to explaining why having it your way would not work. I'm not sure where your comment is coming from though. Who are you to decide how they will do their work? It seems they have decided for themselves and it's in conflict with what you want. Then we don't know why you want this because you haven't provided any reason, reference to authority or any other clues. From my perspective, the IETF and their standards don't exist in a vacuum and their actions have consequences, sometimes of an ethical nature. They seem to agree. It seems prudent that they come to a consensus on what their ethics are, document them and try to abide by them. It's just a case of having a consistent and open policy on a matter which can't be avoided. That is, they will do right or wrong whether they document their intention or not since their actions sometimes have such ethical consequences. Why stick one's head in the sand?

ergl 6y ago

Seems like IETF's mission statement disagrees with you: > The Internet isn't value-neutral, and neither is the IETF. We want the Internet to be useful for communities that share our commitment to openness and fairness. We embrace technical concepts such as decentralized control, edge-user empowerment and sharing of resources. https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3935 https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3935

wyc 6y ago
Also, the IETF has no formal membership roster or membership requirements, and all participants and managers are volunteers.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]