[ih] IETF relevance (was Memories of Flag Day?)

[Michael Thomas]

On 8/29/23 8:42 PM, John Klensin via Internet-history wrote:
> Dave,
> Depending on how "originated" is defined and what hair-splitting one wants
> to do, I think that could probably be said of almost any protocol developed
> in the last 20 years or so, in any Area, and possibly even without the
> restriction to success.  I can't imagine someone coming to the IESG today,
> saying "I see this problem and I think the IETF should form a WG and figure
> out a solution".  I think they would be told to come back when they had
> some ideas, to take the problem to the IRTF and see what traction they got
> there, or maybe to see if they could organize a mailing list and get people
> to propose solutions and a WG charter.

Anybody who knows anything about IETF process knows that there is a 
structural process against progress for people to insert themselves into 
the process for their own gain and aggrandizement (not calling you out, 
John, totally respect you). The best thing is to get all of your ducks 
in a row and expect that the standards potatoes who have their own 
agendas before you get to IETF. In the current case of DKIM on this 
list, there were several of those who have never written a line of code 
who know better than those of us who write code. They are who we have to 
deal with. They are the problem. They (and me) are why we don't want 
anything to do with IETF. You want to improve IETF? Devalue them. The 
creators vs. the clingers on.

Mike