Subject: Re: We're officially a cabal

From: Ted Lemon <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2014 17:05:43 +0000

On Feb 28, 2014, at 11:57 PM, John Levine <[email-masked]> wrote:
> The IETF is #3, while the IAB is only #5.

Wow, that was so bad it was awesome!

It would be a shame if people took it at face value, though.

---

From: Warren Kumari <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2014 17:16:15 +0000

> It would be a shame if people took it at face value, though.

I must admit that I kinda liked the "If the developers of the Internet
are students, then the IETF act as their tutors, teaching and
providing guidance to those wanting to improve the Internet" bit -- it
made me feel that I'm much smarter and more gracious than I really am.
Heck, I even went out and purchased a pipe and tweed jacket with
leather elbow patches...

W

---

From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2014 22:21:09 +0000

The story didn't mention the Elders of the Internet

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDbyYGrswtg

I hear Jari is off to Big Ben on Tuesday, could he be bringing the Internet
to the social?

-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/

---

From: Spencer Dawkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2014 03:46:07 -0600

> Heck, I even went out and purchased a pipe and tweed jacket with

The cabal-ness quotient just rose, considering that the IAOC knew that 
that article was going to be published years in advance and arranged 
that IETF 89 would be held where your pipe and tweeds would be easy to 
find ...

Spencer

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2014 09:55:22 +0000

> The IETF is #3, while the IAB is only #5.

The fact that we promote the view that the IAB is separate from the IETF 
is an actual problem we should worry about.  It's misleading.

d/

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net

---

From: Brian E Carpenter <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2014 23:00:17 +1300

> is an actual problem we should worry about.  It's misleading.

I don't think so. Try telling the IRTF that it's part
of the IETF because it reports to the IAB. Ditto the
RFC Editor or the Independent Series Editor. And I can't
even find words to summarise the IANA complications.

    Brian

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2014 10:05:34 +0000

> even find words to summarise the IANA complications.

Thanks for highlighting our classic confusion between internal 
differentiation and public realities.

When folks say "IETF" they mean the aggregation of IETF, IRTF, IAB and 
RFC-Editor.  They see -- and we really are -- a single organization, in 
the context of the larger world.

IANA is, at least, a sub-contracted function with an independent entity.

On the other hand, ISOC is also an entity that is separate from the IETF 
-- from which the IETF gets very financial, legal and administrative 
services -- but we (and they) promote the view that we are a component 
of ISOC.

d/

---

From: [email-masked] (Dale R. Worley)
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2014 12:38:57 -0500 (EST)

> From: "John Levine" <[email-masked]>
> 
> See "These six organizations secretly run the Internet":
> 
> http://bgr.com/2014/02/19/who-runs-the-internet-6-secret-companies/

Clearly "the I* leaders" need to put out a press release about this...

BTW, did anyone notice that the the "I* leaders" e-mail from the Chair
that started that discussion was encoded in "charset=windows-1252"
rather than ASCII or UTF-8?  So much for standards...

Dale

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2014 21:56:09 +0000

> rather than ASCII or UTF-8?  So much for standards...

That would be because Jari is Finnish, ASCII lacks Finnish characters,
ISO/IEC 8859-1 lacks some Finnish characters, -15 adds them but no-one
uses it, and Finnish adoption of UTF-8 has been slow because everyone's
already using Windows, which solved the localisation problem long before
the standards bodies did.

Lloyd Wood
http://about.me/lloydwood

---

From: <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2014 21:58:10 +0000

> Try telling the IRTF that it's part
> of the IETF because it reports to the IAB.

Better to use the fact that the IRTF piggybacks off IETF meetings
and consumes IETF resources, rather like a parasite on a host.

Lloyd Wood

---

From: Bob Braden <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 09:49:20 -0800

Dave Crocker,

Are you suggesting that research is a subset of engineering?

Bob Braden

On 3/2/2014 1:55 AM, Dave Crocker wrote:
> The fact that we promote the view that the IAB is separate from the 
> IETF is an actual problem we should worry about.  It's misleading.
>
> d/
>

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2014 17:59:51 +0000

>> IETF is an actual problem we should worry about.  It's misleading.

Hi Bob,

I'm as fond of creative misinterpretation as anyone, but this is not a 
good venue or topic for indulging in it.

d/

---

From: Joe Touch <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 15:47:52 -0800

On 3/1/2014 9:16 AM, Warren Kumari wrote:
> providing guidance to those wanting to improve the Internet"

Pity the IETF doesn't include many actual educators anymore. Perhaps 
they remembered that they should get paid to teach.

Joe

---

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2014 05:16:08 +0100

At the new comer tutorial on Sunday (Bradner, 2014, IETF structure and
Internet Standard Process, slide 37), it shows that: the IAB, IASA, IAD,
IESG, and RFC are parts of IETF (only separated IRTF and IANA). Was that
correct or I may misunderstood the tutorial?

Best regards
Abdussalam