Re: Affirmation of the Modern Global Standards Paradigm

Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net> Wed, 15 August 2012 12:38 UTC

Return-Path: <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
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 9D18421F87D6 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 05:38:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.608
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.608 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.009, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 OsIi0mCFDMp6 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 05:38:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id BF46B21F877E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 15 Aug 2012 05:38:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 15 Aug 2012 12:38:05 -0000
Received: from a88-115-216-191.elisa-laajakaista.fi (EHLO [192.168.100.105]) [88.115.216.191] by mail.gmx.net (mp024) with SMTP; 15 Aug 2012 14:38:05 +0200
X-Authenticated: #29516787
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+QC7crsMuQJ5MaMVMPCmtD4hXFzP5zEgsC7UVUHo 3iRPbcL20yIt4x
Subject: Re: Affirmation of the Modern Global Standards Paradigm
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
In-Reply-To: <5E893DB832F57341992548CDBB333163A5A9B46658@EMBX01-HQ.jnpr.net>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 15:38:03 +0300
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8972B876-DD01-474E-9234-0133DC9DC119@gmx.net>
References: <5E893DB832F57341992548CDBB333163A5A9B462FF@EMBX01-HQ.jnpr.net> <502B40B7.8050100@cisco.com> <502B48E8.7060104@gmail.com> <5E893DB832F57341992548CDBB333163A5A9B46658@EMBX01-HQ.jnpr.net>
To: John E Drake <jdrake@juniper.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: "iab@iab.org" <iab@iab.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
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: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 12:38:13 -0000

On Aug 15, 2012, at 3:16 PM, John E Drake wrote:

>> I take it that John's question is really *why* do these principles need
>> to be articulated in public. Perhaps the IAB should answer that, but my
>> answer
>> is: because there is a real danger of some SDOs, including but not
>> limited to the ITU-T, breaking them for a variety of commercial or
>> political reasons.
> 
> JD:  And how does this document prevent this abuse?

Of course a document by itself, even if it contains the nicest principles, cannot prevent abuse. 
So, see it rather as a writeup that tries to capture the understanding of a number of SDOs.