Re: Protocols at the Point of a Gun

[Jeff Weinstein <jsw@netscape.com>]

Duncan Frissell wrote:
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> 
> At 02:38 PM 4/9/96 -0400, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> 
> >The internet and the culture are coming into conflict in a big way,
> >and I don't believe that both of them can survive.
> >
> >Perry
> 
> Well this is as good a time and place as any to ask the question that
> none of the opposition seems to have asked (perhaps because they don't
> know enough to ask):  How do you force geographically dispersed nodes
> on a distributed network to adopt a set of officially mandated protocols?
> 
> But first a reading assignment:  "How Anarchy Works--Inside the Internet
> Engineering Task Force" from Wired.
> 
> http://www.hotwired.com/wired/3.10/departments/electrosphere/ietf.html
> 
> So, now we know that the IETF has been pretty successful as a means
> of standards setting.  We then have to go on to discuss how The Great
> Enemy might undertake to intervene in this process.

  Given that the IETF has no "official" (whatever that means) sanction,
what would prevent any other organization from coming in and trying to
take over their turf?  I saw an article today (sorry, can't remember
where) that suggested a brewing fight between IETF and W3C over future
HTTP and HTML standards.  If someone stands up and says that the IETF 
is becoming too slow and overcome by bickering (not my opinion, just
a what if), and that their new group is better suited to setting standards,
who decides who is right, and based on what criteria?  It seems that
one aspect of anarchy is that anyone could move in and replace "their
anarchy" with the "new anarchy".

  Just some philosophical pondering late one night...

	--Jeff

-- 
Jeff Weinstein - Electronic Munitions Specialist
Netscape Communication Corporation
jsw@netscape.com - http://home.netscape.com/people/jsw
Any opinions expressed above are mine.