IETF Brickbats in Slashdot BEEP Discussion

UnderStandardization Cabal
Interesting IETF-related allegations and counter-allegations in this Slashdot thread. Excerpts (in order but without context):
Zeinfeld: The other problem is the nature of the IETF these days. The problem is that they talk a good talk about being open and such, but it is really an old-boys club. The old-fart faction is strong on the IESG and IAB, they have known each other for 20 years and they don't want anyone messing with their turf.

In theory the IETF process is open. In practice there are a bunch of shadowy cliques who make the real decisions in private.

mrose: contrary to popular belief, i don't need to go looking for trouble. in this case, it was a couple of ADs leaving an early sacred meeting, shaking their heads, and then asking me to beat some sense into some folks.

if you're unhappy that i stuck my nose in your business, then all i can suggest is you get more clueful in the application design space, so "the management" doesn't feel they have to go out and get you help. particularly help that you don't like, and especially help that would rather be doing other things with other people.

Zeinfeld:I don't much care for the arrogance of the IETF 'management' as you call them. I certainly don't appreciate folk who think that they have the right to make the type of off-hand blanket pronouncements on other people's work that you and they make habittually without backing it up. Your Xerox comment is absolutely typical of IETF old fartism, you want to have the right to be dismissive, you don't have the technical arguments on your side. So instead of detailing a real technical issue you allude to an earlier system, the more obscure the better. The message: 'I am too important to have to justify my comments but I believe that you are not competent to work on this problem'.

Zeinfeld's comments ring true to me, based on the experience I had in activities related to the IMPP Working Group, 1998-2000. Almost every second of effort devoted to satisfying the (sometimes contradictory) priorities supplied by the IETF "elders" was wasted. Got an interesting protocol idea? Ignore the IETF. Deployed protocols with momentum may be able to survive in the IETF process -- but fresh new proposals only go there to die.

Comments: Post a Comment