[arch-d] Other SDOs (Re: ETSI launches new group on Non-IP Networking addressing 5G new services)

Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Thu, 09 April 2020 12:26 UTC

Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BC193A0A0A for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 05:26:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FGCs9qck6EpM for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 05:26:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9CF73A0A08 for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 05:26:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.16.42.112] (p548DCD70.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [84.141.205.112]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gabriel-vm-2.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 48ygPR1FYYzyrc; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 14:26:51 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <20200408194154.GJ28965@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2020 14:26:50 +0200
Cc: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>, architecture-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mao-Original-Outgoing-Id: 608128010.518101-dc0e28d143ec75d26f755bba944016bb
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <C6378454-EE7A-4CBB-A109-C0D969A81715@tzi.org>
References: <60a10451-5fbd-fcec-5389-7a72870dcc84@gmail.com> <6A3A4410-A889-46C7-8FD5-7C5AA85486A1@tzi.org> <20200408054204.GA6005@nic.fr> <6C2A3533-7F75-45B1-9B51-19938597174B@tzi.org> <20200408194154.GJ28965@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
To: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/pkcgHeAq6gQ7QuwXWcc2tlhrrwU>
Subject: [arch-d] Other SDOs (Re: ETSI launches new group on Non-IP Networking addressing 5G new services)
X-BeenThere: architecture-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: open discussion forum for long/wide-range architectural issues <architecture-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/architecture-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:architecture-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2020 12:26:57 -0000

On 2020-04-08, at 21:41, Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> wrote:
> 
> When would have
> IETF leadership ever have tried to explain/help IETF attendants to
> do better work in another SDO ?

I’m not sure WG chairs qualify as “leadership” in your view (they do, in my view), but that has been a constant theme for us in IoT-land.

> Which meeting did i miss about this ?

Well, we didn’t quite start by saying “this is the way we, the IETF, will work with other SDOs, now eat it”.  We started by working with other SDOs and tried to find out what they actually need.
Interestingly, one of the homes of that work is the T2TRG, as it turns out that IETF and other-SDO work isn’t already perfectly aligned, so you need a wider view (and a longer outlook) to really be useful.

I’m sure we are not yet nearly doing enough of this, but you can’t say we (as an organization) ignore working with other SDOs.

> Maybe with the small exception of RTCweb and W3C (or maybe even more
> in APP, i am not that much involved there).

It may help that some of the IoT work is in ART (which encompasses what previously was APP).

Grüße, Carsten