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

Hi SM, 

> At 00:35 10-04-2012, Hannes Tschofenig wrote:
> >The title "finance area mailing list" is probably the wrong term.
> >Instead, we are talking
> 
> Yes.
> 
> This is not the ideal venue for discussing about the creation of a
> new (IETF) area in my opinion.

I completely agree! That makes no sense. 

> 
> >I don't know how far these attempts are away from what Walter is
> >trying to accomplish. I believe the main disconnect is in the
> >understanding of how the process works in bringing work to the IETF
> >and the lack of agreed terminology and scope makes is easy to talk
> >past each other.
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> Although I do point people to the "Tao" and other process-related
> documents (see http://www.ietf.org/newcomers.html for a starter
> guide), it is not helpful to people trying to understand how the
> process works and to bring new work in the IETF.  Please note that
> this should not be construed as an opinion about whether person X is
> a newcomer or not.

Makes sense. 

> 
> >Once getting to the point of talking about the same topic there are
> >various other challenges, such as
> >* who are all the stakeholders that need to be involved?
> >* are these communities interested to bring their work to the IETF?
> 
> The problem has turned into a catch 22.  There is a view that having
> an IETF mailing list would allow communities interested in bringing
> their work to the IETF to discuss and build support.  There is
> another view that by having such a mailing list, the IETF is
> "blessing" the work.

Yes, a challenging situation. 
> 
> A mailing list allows focused discussions by a group of people
> interested in working on, for example, protocol X.  The absence of a
> mailing list does not hinder that.  One could look at this in terms
> of discussions.  If the volume of discussions is significant enough,
> it makes sense to move the discussion to a new mailing list if there
> isn't already one.

I agree with you. 

> 
> >* why did various earlier attempts fail?
> 
> Previous attempts have been about EDINT.  That is not the same as the
> problem discussed recently.

I have not been involved in that specific effort. Cannot comment. 

>From a protocol point of view the topic seems pretty easy. Hence, the
problems must be somewhere else. I believe I know why the Internet Open
Trading Protocol failed. More focused attempts on the other hand have
been quite successful, for example, Diameter Credit Control.

Ciao
Hannes

> 
> Regards,
> -sm
> 
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> apps-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss