[ih] Cluster Addressing and CIDR

[John Day]

At 18:21 -0700 1/14/03, Andrew Russell wrote:
>>My experience is that formality creeps in primarily as the process 
>>is abused.  The more it is abused the more necessary it is to make 
>>rules about things where it could be assumed that good and fair 
>>behavior would prevail.  As the stakes increase, that becomes less 
>>the case. The only way for it not to happen is to work on things 
>>that few people care about!  Either because they don't know it is 
>>important or because it isn't!
>>
>>Take care,
>>John
>
>From my research into the early institution-building of Internet 
>standards (ICCB, IAB, IETF), it seems that another reason for 
>building in formality is to allow open participation. As 
>participation

I don't see how formality allows open participation.  Generally, the 
minimal number of rules is best and then only to ensure fair 
participation.  My experience has been that the number of rules and 
the formality of the process increases either when fairness is abused 
or one group attempts to maintain control of the process.  The first 
is a case where without written rules some try to use the fact that 
"there is no rule that says I can't" to abuse a fair and reasonable 
process.

Initially there were very few if any written rules.  My understanding 
is that the rules in place came about when it became clear that the 
IETF/IESG/IAB etc.  needed to be able to ensure that a process was 
followed that would not subject it to law suits or claims of 
anti-trust behavior.  The process was and always has been about as 
open as you can get without formality.  Frankly, I think the current 
process is so open that it provides the perfect disguise for 
manipulation by anyone with the resources to play the game.

Take care,
John