Re: [apps-discuss] Proposal for a Finance Area Mailing List

[Walter <[e-mail]>]

>>> All of the above are application-specific, and can be conveyed IMHO over
>>> existing specified protocols.
>>
>> That's true. However, taking that view purely you could similarly
>> argue that almost everything is out of IETF scope because IPv4, TCP
>> and UDP exist.
>
> Indeed, XMPP, for example, and many other protocols that are
> application-specific are standardized here are standardized here.

Sincere thanks for taking the time to reply. In case there's an
audience still out there in the distinctly echoey (echoey...) halls of
this thread, I have tried to address the valid points you raised
below.

> I think the questions regarding whether to standardize financial
> protocols here or not will be the same as with other application
> protocols (and sub-IP protocols, for that matter).  Maybe someone more
> familiar with past debates on similar issues can give us some
> background.

As a student and aspiring author of history myself, I do not in any
way wish to dissuade valuable historic inquiry, but this does seem a
tad tangential in light of the apparent existence of formalized
statements regarding the IETF's role and process. (That is, unless the
IETF has somehow descended in to the dark and near unnavigable realm
of ... "case law".*)

* Possible theme for a future roguelike? "You prize open the case law
archive. Mouldy remnants of past inquiry flap woefully in the
millennial breeze. The stench of legal aid skeletons and ancient
coffee emanates up from what must once have been a cheaply carpeted
floor."

> I suspect it will all come down to: how many participants
> are willing to work on this,

While we really do need the forum before collecting participants, we
can probably safely assume at least a smattering of mutual credit
communities, plus Bitcoin and other digital currency people, possibly
some financially oriented software vendors, some techier market and
banking people, etc. Maybe some big name companies - 'social' and so
forth - who are basically moving in to private currency accounting.
Such people are actually around (we have been in touch with quite a
few), it's just that many will need a neutral, focused forum to
congregate on definable problems before coming out of the woodwork for
procedural reasons.

> how many are willing to review,

Not to run before we walk ... I think gathering people to discuss the
perceived needs of individual community segments and come up with some
ideas for shared solutions (that do not sacrifice interoperability) is
the immediate task; latter issues of formal review MAY follow.

> whether
> there is any running code,

As above. In addition, running code has already been deemed "a tad
excessive" earlier on this thread:
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg04519.html

> whether the wider community can be of help,

Certainly there are multiple parties identified who have worked in
this direction in the past (see
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg04511.html)
and multiple parties who are working in this direction at present,
though exclusively with narrower scope:
 - Ripple: http://ripple-project.org/Protocol/Protocol
 - CES (private communication, 2012): http://ces.org.za/
 - W3C Web Payments Community Group: http://www.w3.org/community/webpayments/

One might add to this short list the tremendous number of financial
services providers (both established and innovative) who currently
consistently present their customers with custom protocols or APIs
(XML, REST, SOAP, JSON RPC, HTTP; often with unique complex event
callback and/or state-based polling mechanisms; the same based on
weird VPNs, leased lines, client certificate SSL systems for security
box-ticking purposes, etc.) even for extremely well trodden settlement
problems (credit cards come to mind, as do mobile operators opening
their consumer billing platforms to payment integration, B2B banking
portals offered by leading banks, etc.).

Each of these entities, their vendors and clients would likely testify
to present pains of implementation: indeed, huge numbers of libraries
and software modules exist purely for specific-vendor-X API
integration purposes (few of which are created - shall we say - equal,
particularly in view of tax, fee, anti-fraud, accounting, auditing and
other related concerns that often slip out of view during small
scale/minimalist integrations).

As for how many might choose to actively contribute, that would be a
forward looking statement. Some will.

In short, there's a huge amount of experience out there in the
community to potentially focus on cost-saving, flexibility enhancing
standardization.  People are motivated, they get it. They've done
Euro, they've done taxes, they've done regulatory change, they've done
protocol upgrades, they've done vendor lock in, they're looking in to
mobile, they're seeing digital currencies. People want an interface
that works, and doesn't need to be thrown out and re-implemented
periodically.  The "wider community" in the non-IETF sense can thus be
relied upon to help, though which quarters specifically will step
forward we will only know in time.  In the IETF-internal sense of
"wider community", when any potential for formalization of output
approaches in the future, I'm sure people will volunteer.

But we will need a mailing list.

> and so on.  We should at least consider it.  My fear is that there
> isn't enough financial clue at the IETF to help the proponents, but
> then, that probably could have been said about the media protocols
> too.

Glad to see we're not on entirely new ground here. While unfamiliar
with the IETF's media protocols history, this seems rather chicken and
egg to me as affiliation with the IETF seems* to be largely based on
mailing list participation. Once formalization arises, surely any
knowledge or assistance required of existing IETF participants
(without necessitating broad finance domain expertise) could be teased
out of some quarter or other...

* "There is no membership in the IETF. Anyone may register for and
attend any meeting. The closest thing there is to being an IETF member
is being on the IETF or Working Group mailing lists".
http://www.ietf.org/tao.html

Thanks again for your valuable feedback.

Regards,
Walter Stanish
Payward, Inc.