Re: Functional differentiation and administrative restructuring

Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Wed, 08 September 2004 13:12 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 JAA09954; Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:12:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C52JP-0000IV-RE; Wed, 08 Sep 2004 09:16:37 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C52CY-0002xI-Pf; Wed, 08 Sep 2004 09:09:30 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C524w-0001eD-4L for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 08 Sep 2004 09:01:38 -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 JAA08972 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:01:36 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([158.38.152.233]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C528Z-0008V9-J0 for ietf@ietf.org; Wed, 08 Sep 2004 09:05:24 -0400
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id A701D61BDC; Wed, 8 Sep 2004 15:01:05 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 15418-06; Wed, 8 Sep 2004 15:01:04 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.1.4] (145.80-202-211.nextgentel.com [80.202.211.145]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2640461B92; Wed, 8 Sep 2004 15:01:04 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 08 Sep 2004 15:01:04 +0200
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
To: scott bradner <sob@harvard.edu>, ietf@ietf.org
Message-ID: <57DE228F73DB737E41FB155B@askvoll.hjemme.alvestrand.no>
In-Reply-To: <20040908112310.8B75E803EA@newdev.harvard.edu>
References: <20040908112310.8B75E803EA@newdev.harvard.edu>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.6 (Linux/x86)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at alvestrand.no
X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: bb8f917bb6b8da28fc948aeffb74aa17
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: 0.1 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 7baded97d9887f7a0c7e8a33c2e3ea1b
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


--On onsdag, september 08, 2004 07:23:10 -0400 scott bradner 
<sob@harvard.edu> wrote:

>
> John sez:
>> But, as far as I can tell, the "separate organization" model
>> bets the entire survival of the IETF against a "nothing will go
>> wrong" assumption.
>
> so far the people who are pushing for the "separate organization" model
> have not come up with anything other than 'it would feel better' or
> 'the future may be different' as reasons
>
> it seems to me that
> 	1/ John is right - this is a 'bet the IETF' move
> 	2/ I'd need see some quite solid reasons to want to take the bet
> 	   so far I have not

I'd call it a bet-the-IETF move either way.

if we move now to a separate support organization closely linked with ISOC, 
we bet the IETF that we can successfully establish and run this, and that 
the picture we present will cause people to continue to support us.

if we move to a support activity within ISOC, we bet that we our current 
confluence of interests will continue, that there will be no important 
conflicts between standards work and other ISOC work, and that ISOC will do 
the job well for the foreseeable future.
And that the picture of ISOC+IETF convinces people to continue to support 
us, of course.

One bet may be safer than the other. But neither is (IMHO) a sure thing.


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf