Protocols at the Point of a Gun

-----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.  

Questions:

1)  Are there any official agencies currently involved in drafting 
substitute protocols?

2) Do the public employees on the IETF behave any differently from the
private employees?

3)  Do the world's governments have the programming talent?
 
4)  Do the world's governments have a way to get users at all levels
to adopt their protocols?

I don't know the answer to these questions.

We know that governments would like to impose things like the Simple
Tax Transfer Protocol on the Net as well as Is A Person (and Is A Minor)
Protocols.  The Heathen Chinee have proposed their own entry into the
protocol design process as have many of the other governments.  Do
they have any idea yet how to go about it?  Do we?

DCF


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQCVAwUBMWu7OYVO4r4sgSPhAQFw8wP/SONzr+vOKaIw3NQPTF4o1xk4hVFrlWEs
y5fLcrh2jHlejPMvdoTNJIvZ0nsgLNJU8QsW+goRzl9B37/8U9oG8A0CgvOu9Wr9
2aP+zkHjTYldvtGuOWXNoq7tdQDGY5cGzMTJZO0WRwMBhpO+BnOGPPN2MqxMOPIK
vbIgly4DEI8=
=57wn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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.

Jeff Weinstein writes:
>   Given that the IETF has no "official" (whatever that means) sanction,

I have no idea what that means. The IETF exists. Who would sanction
it? Why would that sanction matter?

> what would prevent any other organization from coming in and trying to
> take over their turf?

Nothing, except that all the people who "count" in the internet,
a.k.a. "The Community", pay attention to us. If we become irrelevant
to the community, we will fade away, which is as it should be.

> 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.

I think way too much is made of that. Most of the same suspects attend
both meetings from what I can tell, and the IETF isn't really under
the illusion that we control HTML.

Perry