Re: Functional differentiation and administrative restructuring
avri@psg.com Wed, 08 September 2004 14:06 UTC
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA13229; Wed, 8 Sep 2004 10:06:46 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C539f-0001Ee-9e; Wed, 08 Sep 2004 10:10:35 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C532Y-0008HB-MK; Wed, 08 Sep 2004 10:03:14 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C531L-0006xo-F9 for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 08 Sep 2004 10:01:59 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA12695 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Sep 2004 10:01:57 -0400 (EDT)
From: avri@psg.com
Received: from tla.crepundia.net ([194.71.127.149] helo=report.tla-group.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C534w-00019m-Ro for ietf@ietf.org; Wed, 08 Sep 2004 10:05:46 -0400
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (report.tla-group.com [194.71.127.149]) by report.tla-group.com (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id i88Di0ep026872 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Sep 2004 15:44:01 +0200
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619)
In-Reply-To: <3470D47048173F2B310F878B@scan.jck.com>
References: <p06110413bd640a63bcb8@[129.46.75.181]> <B46C0FE1ED11AA817149589D@scan.jck.com> <0D614A12-0196-11D9-B7C7-000393CC2112@psg.com> <3470D47048173F2B310F878B@scan.jck.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Message-Id: <A2353EE4-019F-11D9-B7C7-000393CC2112@psg.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2004 10:01:51 -0400
To: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.619)
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: d185fa790257f526fedfd5d01ed9c976
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: Functional differentiation and administrative restructuring
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: c3a18ef96977fc9bcc21a621cbf1174b
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hi John, No problem, my skin is not that thin. As i have tried to explain on the IETF list, i think we need to understand all options including these two extremes - the ones not specifically covered in the mud document. I find the models expressed in the document somewhat incomplete and slightly disingenuous in that they don't discuss the implications of the end of the road - as far as i can tell they hand wave about 'extraneous' results. And while I have never managed to get invovled in the policy part of IETF+ISOC, it is something i care about quite a bit. So if my notes provoke the discussion, even in the form of 'rants', i am satisfied. And thanks for the apology. a. ps. i don't have the negative connotations to absorbtion that you do. I see that as another term for merger, though, since ISOC is the real entity from a corporate point of view, it would constitute an absortion. It is the conditions, as in by-law changes and perhaps MOUs, that determine whether this is beneficial or destructive. On 8 sep 2004, at 09.41, John C Klensin wrote: > > > --On Wednesday, 08 September, 2004 08:53 -0400 avri@psg.com > wrote: > >> Hi John, >> >> Thanks for you analysis. It was something I felt lacking and >> has helping me in my wavering between the absorption into ISOC >> model and the independent corporate model. >> >> I look forward to your analysis of the absorption model. > > Avri, I want to apologize in advance for using your note as the > excuse for the rant below. You are certainly not the first > person to do this and probably won't be the last; your note just > arrived at a convenient time. > > <rant> > I think we need to be very careful about slapping labels of > convenience on options and then getting distracted by what those > labels "mean". Doing so can really distract from a productive > discussion in which information is exchanged. There has been > a lot of that sort of distraction, and the associated confusion, > going on, since even before San Diego. > > "Absorption" is a loaded term. If we are asked "how would you > like to be absorbed into foo", the answer has got to be "no". > For me, at least, the recurring image is some rather unpleasant > (for the food) digestion process. But, to my knowledge, no one > has seriously proposed anything of the sort. Certainly the > standards process has not been "absorbed". I doubt that the > RFC Editor staff would consider themselves "absorbed". There > are unincorporated organizations in addition than the IETF which > have worked closely with ISOC for years and haven't been > "absorbed" either. > > And "independent corporate model", while less loaded > semantically (at least for me), is almost equally bad: to the > best of my knowledge, no one has really seriously proposed that > either, since "independent" would imply "own fundraising" and > presumably untangling the standards model which is now seriously > intertwined with ISOC. As long as critical pieces of those > things remain in ISOC's hands, we aren't "independent" in any of > the normal senses of that term. > </rant> > > john > > > > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
- Re: Functional differentiation and administrative… scott bradner
- Functional differentiation and administrative res… Ted Hardie
- Re: Functional differentiation and administrative… John C Klensin
- Re: Functional differentiation and administrative… avri
- Re: Functional differentiation and administrative… Harald Tveit Alvestrand
- Re: Functional differentiation and administrative… John C Klensin
- Re: Functional differentiation and administrative… avri
- Re: Functional differentiation and administrative… John C Klensin
- Re: Functional differentiation and administrative… Ted Hardie