Re: What's wrong with protocol competition?

[Carl Malamud <[e-mail]>]

Dan -

It is not our interpretation that the system would have "exactly one
Working Group for each problem that the Technical Board wants to deal
with" nor that the WG "will not want to take the time to consider more
than one solution for its problem."

Perhaps our language was not clear enough, but it seems to me that the
WG has a *responsibility* to consider all the solutions to a problem
and, if appropriate, pick multiple multiple solutions, no solutions, or
combine solutions together.  We also see a process where the technical
board may charter/pick working groups, but it could also be initiated
by somebody like you: if you have a substantial soilution to a real
problem, the technical board is *obligated* to form an open working
group to consider your solution.

Most importantly, though, we haven't specified the mechanics of how
working groups get going and how long they live.  It would be up to the
Technical Board to formulate those objective criteria in a way we can
all understand.  If you don't like the criteria, you simply elect a new
batch of leaders at the next election.  If the criteria are violated,
you get an open hearing in front of the process board.

Carl