Modern Global Standards Paradigm

jean-michel bernier de portzamparc <jmabdp@gmail.com> Sun, 12 August 2012 18:10 UTC

Return-Path: <jmabdp@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0767121F852E for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 11:10:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F8emPVDguVyA for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 11:09:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-bk0-f44.google.com (mail-bk0-f44.google.com [209.85.214.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 036C821F85ED for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 11:09:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by bkty7 with SMTP id y7so1312870bkt.31 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 11:09:58 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=YymqBxjQfJrqs3zlwdLAqw0iNGJ1GZ22cfdD0RVMz90=; b=WeemF0rIZbCUm9UmkCKhRn6Gb2Zdelk0odlYzGHsuD9mc/XL2ROBOd4XGCHO8q9J2c ibvJFZXVPV6tWNTQYHPndX/y5eJatOpc+b4elNQ4FB76r/a/9RTNqVAwYs0Od20ByVIr nKLejfBCgl8jTmldJYnntJFK7v2R87MIELxF6VquRg9GADMmDWxsFGHCEZ88kCXBZcNq QOH2cWanbYQClTVKnWF8FpFF0jAVKbqKACW3Hp//XfnW9SjeFGEcR1j0yUB7P5EaNc4c o3FKVSrWoA0bx2PiFRtM71qOxog7EF5owHxHtycp9pC6Mpuls7wyMas8yorLMBJGrlzL LYAw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.205.137.8 with SMTP id im8mr3180718bkc.135.1344794997735; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 11:09:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.204.113.78 with HTTP; Sun, 12 Aug 2012 11:09:57 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 20:09:57 +0200
Message-ID: <CAGzJzZ5GFPsoasfLB8hGmVB5DWGKED2acs7CwfSWbp_JFXu7Mg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Modern Global Standards Paradigm
From: jean-michel bernier de portzamparc <jmabdp@gmail.com>
To: IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 18:10:00 -0000

For your information the IUSG (interested in the Intelligent Use of
the whole digital ecosystem) has just released the following statement
which reflect a friendly but non-IETF evaluation of the "Modern Global
Standards Paradigm" document proposed by the IETF and IAB Chairs to
the endorsement of other SDOs and proposes a way to best build on it.
Portzamparc

This matter is a matter of trust in the IETF (as well as in the whole
US organized I* structural set: ICANN, IANA, GAC) and how to
restore/maintain confidence.

As IUsers (Members of the IUse community interested in an intelligent
use of the whole digital ecosystem), FLOSS developers, end-users,
governments, and operators, we are accustomed to trusting the ITU in
its plug to plug basic interconnection services area. We are not
accustomed yet to trusting the “I*” structural set in its end to end
value-added interoperations service area.
This is for the very reasons that the IAB started to pertinently
document but with no effective result in RFC 3869.
This is because the IETF did not want to participate in the WSIS consensus.
This is because the IETF considered us in the way that they think the
ITU considers them.
This is due to our patient and friendly (sometimes tough) experience
of the ICANN, ISOC, IETF, IANA, and GAC attitude and culture.

We want this to be corrected, the IETF to relax, and everyone to
obtain clearer documentation of the UDP/TCP/SCTP strata, to ensure
that the Internet technology and its R&D are not under direct or
indirect commercial influence and its governance is not solely
conducted by the USG. This is also the case because some of us and
commercial interests as well are engaged in exploring, testing, and
documenting, in coordination with the IETF, the fringe to fringe
extended services “Internet+” area, and its non-ITU/IETF documented
layers. We need credibility, stability, and homogeneity and simple
interfaces in the Internet area as all of us currently have from the
ITU. Please understand that in this Internet+ endeavor we do not want
to obey the ITU and IETF more than you want to obey the ITU and our
emerging IUTF. However, we need non blocking clarity, transparency,
and predictability.

Our suggestion is, instead of unilaterally promoting a standardization
BCP in pure American IETF language along a non IETF documented
process, to propose an RFC 3869bis open working group with people from
all the concerned SDOs, the ITU to begin with, in order to reflect a
standardization world ethitechnical (ethic of technical
standardization) consensus on the way, not to best sign clients or
deliver to subscribers, but to intelligently serve us, the users.

To contribute to this effort, we have engaged ourselves in a
reflection on the matter at
http://iutf.org/wiki/Modern_Global_Standards_Paradigm. We will see how
it develops. Should a WG/RFC3869Bis be created, IUSG would certainly
participate.

(http://iusg.org/wiki/20120813_-_Statement_proposing_an_open_IETF/WG/RFC3869bis):