RE: constitutional convention

[Margaret Wasserman <mrw@windriver.com>]

At 03:51 PM 7/23/2003 +0200, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
> One serious organisation issue is the:
>
>  - What are our goals/objectives
>  - What kind of organisation do we want to be.
Yes, as you say, I think that many of the conflicts in our
organization stem from the fact that people have different
ideas about what we are trying to do and how we are trying
to do it.

> It is important at least to get to consensus on the question
> of "Do we want to be a standards setting organisation or not"
According to the mission that the I* has put forth (produce
high quality, relevant standards for the Internet), our
only mission is to be a standards-setting organization.
However, this mission hasn't really been socialized in
the community, and there are people (including me) who
don't believe that it captures what we do, never mind why
we do it...

I'd prefer a mission that runs something like:

"Provide a fair, open and effective forum for the specification
of interoperable protocols and operational best practices that
support the continued growth and advancement of a stable, secure
Internet that is accessible to everyone."

To me, there are a few precious things that make the IETF
worthwhile, and they should be captured in our mission:

- We are an open forum -- anyone can participate, and our
  work is available to everyone.
- We focus our efforts on advancing the global Internet, not
  on any one market or technology.
- We hold shared beliefs about privacy, fairness and the
  importance of building an Internet that is truly accessible
  to everyone.

IMO, if we don't keep these things alive, in our culture and
in our actions, we might as well publicly transfer "ownership"
of the IETF specifications to the ITU or the IEEE and go home.

Margaret







> Up till now, I have worked under the assumption that we are
> a standards setting organisation. But many people seem to
> disagree with that assumption.
>
> Thanks,
> Bert