Subject: IETF is *NOT* the internet community

From: Bob Allisat <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 07:28:59 -0400 (EDT)

There is a unique and highly delusory belief among the devotees
 of the IETF that they somehow either are or stand in place of
 something they call the "Internet Community". When I cast my eyes
 out to the modern Internet not only could any such idea be further
 from the truth it is derisivel and decisively fraudulant. Perhaps
 ten years ago the IETF claim of hegemony over the Internet due
 to it's representativeness had validity. Today there is no shred
 of reality in the assertion.

 Hundreds of millions of normal, non-mensaianic citizens make up 
 the internet community. Which is more and more resembling the real
 time communities of the globe with each passing day. The IETF does
 not either reflect or represent the people of the world. And all
 the denials, list filtering and pompous wind from the likes of Baker
 and Alvestrand can change that. The IEFT is NOT the internet
 community. Not since 1989. And even that is suspect since at that
 time the Internet was basically a tool of the US defense industry
 to co-ordinate academic planning for weapons creation. Any way
 you look at it the IETF is illegitimate and highly unrepresentative.

 I would like to echo Rahmat M.Samik-Ibrahim's statement that ...
 "There is a need for a publicly recorded feedback mechanism for
 the Internet Standard Process." I would also like to go further
 and add that a control mechanism is even more critical than mere
 feedback and oversight. We have to wrestle CONTROL out of the hands
 of the technicians and place it in the trust of elected citizens.
 Who are highly more likely to act in the general good of the public 
 than this small band of corporate financed technocrats. In fact much
 of the technological foot dragging and slowing of change and net
 evolution vcan be directly traced to the IETF and it's reluctance
 and inability to deal with recent Internet developments. A situation
 that is not only highly explosive but alos extremely unsatisfactory.

 The sooner we depose the IETF and all other false monopolies from
 their positions of sole authority and unquestioned power the sooner
 the medium begins responding to real, grassroots needs. Not merely
 aping the requirements of the few corporations the IETF boys are all
 principles or major share holders in. Basically the message is this:
 fuck the IETF if it continues to fuck us. It's just that simple.

 Bob Allisat

 Free Community Network ... [email-masked] __ http://fcn.net

---

From: "Robert G. Ferrell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 08:39:46 -0500 (CDT)

> Any way

[...]

> Perhaps

Perhaps I'm missing some salient point here, but I thought the IETF was just a 
bunch of volunteers with sufficient technical expertise to get things done who 
created standards that could (optionally) be adopted by people wanting to be 
able to communicate with one another over the extremely heterogeneous system 
that is the Internet.  I work for the US Federal Government, so I know 
regulation when I see it.  The IETF doesn't regulate anything or tell anyone 
what to do.  The Internet Community itself has adopted the RFC as the 
communications standards development tool of choice; it wasn't foisted on them 
by a cartel of power-hungry moguls.  I've been involved in the Internet since 
the mid-seventies, and I see the IETF as a natural progression from the loose 
bands of technical enthusiasts scattered around at universities and government 
agencies to an international forum for establishing and promulagating 
engineering standards.  Anyone who cares to may participate.

>  the internet community. 

Exactly.  And any one of them can be part of the IETF at any time.  Despite the 
vague utopian longings being evinced here, I can state without fear of (valid) 
repudiation that 99% of those "normal citizens" don't know and don't want to 
know anything about how or why the Internet works.

>  the Internet Standard Process." 

Let's see...I sign up for a mailing list (no one asks me to prove my  
qualifications), I read the posts, I submit my comments and suggestions.  Sounds 
pretty public to me already.  What else could we do?  Run an international 
referendum every time a new standard is proposed?  I'm all for it, so long as 
you coordinate the logistics and guarantee that the votes will be tallied in my 
lifetime.

> I would also like to go further

This is starting to sound a bit Marxist.  The workers must control the means of 
production, then RISE UP and SMASH the power elite. Viva La Revolución!
 
>  than this small band of corporate financed technocrats. 

I don't know what country you're from, but in the US the assertion that publicly 
elected officials automatically act in the public best interest is flatly 
contradicted by the simplest observable example: Congress (who represents 
whatever special interest group is spending the most this week).

>A situation
>  principles or major share holders in. 

OK, maybe we're not talking about the same organization here.  To me the IETF is 
the Internet Engineering Task Force.  To which one are you referring?  I think 
the vast majority of us aren't major stockholders in anything, just people who 
understand and want to improve the Internet for everyone. 

> Basically the message is this:

If you have a viable alternative to the IETF that won't end up being populated 
by the same people and run the same way, let's hear it.  If you just want to 
complain, that's OK, too, because this is a public forum.  If it weren't, we 
would never have seen this rant, would we? 

RGF 

=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=
Robert G. Ferrell
Internet Technologist
National Business Center, US DOI  [email-masked]
***************************************************************
private static class NT extends DOS implements Nothing {
***************************************************************

---

From: "Robert G. Ferrell" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 1999 08:39:46 -0500 (CDT)

[...]

 

RGF

---

From: "鄭志文 (Chih-Wen Cheng)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 1999 09:04:22 +0800

Hi to every volunteers to the IETF society. I somewhat agree with the
viewpoint of Scot. I am also very new to the IETF if according to the
official definition of IETF's charter. I just recently subscribed a few mail
lists and try to absorb what has been discussed already up to now and also
try to understand the "group actions and its behaviors". I do appreciate all
those who are so enthusiastic contributing to the technical development of
Internet. Just as Scot pointed out that the basis of the Internet and
Democratic Society as a whole, is the ability to speak your mind and hope
you are heard. I at this point so far don't see any one of this two
societies (IETF v.s. any democratic part) resemble truly to their original
spirit. Maybe this is because we are as human beings, we have deep feeling
to whoever we are "good friends" with or with the same interested group.

Yes, IEFT mail list is setup as a public forum the way as Internet itself.
But I do see folks only communicate to who they are acquainted with and not
responding to the new comers or outsiders. Just as the standard protocols to
behave, different machines should able to talk to each other. We as the
technician make the protocols somehow only willing to talk to a few "brand
names". This is what I believe Bob and Scot really meant. I would like to
ask the courtesy to accept new comers and to reply to the people who are new
to the group. Don't let them alone to embarrass them to leave the
discussion.

Chih-Wen

END OF THIS MESSAGE
------------------------------------------------------------
Chih-Wen Cheng
Broadband Network Systems Department  (K300)
Computer & Communication Research Laboratories  (CCL)
Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI)

Address: Bldg. 51,  K300/ CCL/ITRI, 195-11 Sec. 4, Chung Hsing Rd.
Chutung, Hsinchu, Taiwan 310, R.O.C.
E-Mail: [email-masked]

WEB:http://www.itri.org.tw/
------------------------------------------------------------

>I do not want to create another storm, or add force to the storm which
>people perceive is being created, but I would like to add some input.
>
>Some of us may not agree with Bob Allisat. We may think he is crazy, we may
>think that he is on drugs, and we may think that he has no grip on reality.
>This may or may not be true. I don't think any of the above is the case. I
>personally agree with many of the things that Bob has to say, although I am
>not quite as vociferous as you may know since you often do not see my name
>on many of the list's e-mails. I also do not use forceful language such as
>seen below in Bob's post.
>
>I will say one thing though. We all at sometime or another use explicatives
>when we are angry or hurt about something. Although Bob's perceptions, and
>actions do not seem to follow the same grain as many of the others here,
>each individual that has replied so far to Bob's posting has infact helped
>to prove his point.
>
>If the majority of this list believes that it has infact acted
appropriately
>and in the best interest of the masses, than I believe that you will also
>agree that what Bob has to say is worthwhile and valid. He is only asking
to
>be heard and is not necessarily asking that you agree with him. I myself
>would love to have to courage to speak as much of my mind, not necessarily
>on these issues, but in general. The basis of the Internet and Democratic
>Society as a whole, is the ability to speak your mind and hope you are
>heard. I do not believe Bob is trying to force his ideals upon anyone. I
>believe he is simply a concerned netizen. All of us on this list are
>concerned netizens by default, and some of our ideas do not follow the
grain
>of the others.
>
>In sum, so what if Bob is different from each of us. We are all different,
>if we weren't than there would not be such things as nations, and there
>would be no difference in the laws that exist between them, and there would
>be no discussions which lead to differences in ideas (please see all
related
>postings as examples). In my opinion, Bob is only asking that we as a whole
>be tolerant of what people have to say. Different opinions and ideas are
the
>root of growth and understanding. Understand the spirit of his postings and
>not dwell on the minutiae or choice of words.
>
>As a human being, and living being. I would ask the same courtesy.
>
>-Scot Mc Pherson
>-Application Engineer
>-Wave Wireless Networking
>-Div. of SPEEDCOM International
>-Phone: 941.358.9283
>-Fax: 941.355.0219
>-E-mail: [email-masked]
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Bob Allisat [mailto:[email-masked]]
>Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 1999 7:29 AM
>To: [email-masked]
>Subject: IETF is *NOT* the internet community
>
>
>