Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!wuarchive!decwrl!ucbvax!CHEETAH.NYSER.NET!mrose
From: mrose@CHEETAH.NYSER.NET (Marshall Rose)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.iso
Subject: Re: kerberos and the ISO protocol standards
Message-ID: <20750.630012382@cheetah.nyser.net>
Date: 18 Dec 89 19:26:22 GMT
References: <16365.629989412@tis.com>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: iso@nic.ddn.mil
Organization: The Internet
Lines: 18

Jim - there are three cases of standardization work:

1. Where there is exactly one de facto standard for a particular kind of
technology.  In this case, standardization is fairly straight-forward.

2. Where there is more than one way of doing it in use, e.g., CO- and CL-
mode networking.  In this case, the committees often take the bells and
whistles of each, e.g., the OSI network layer.

3. There there is no de facto standard, e.g., the application layer framework.
In this case, the committees often engage in what might be mistermed
"research", e.g., the OSI appliation layer structure.

Your analysis is correct in case 1.  In cases 2 and 3, we usually get truly
horrible stuff (e.g., the OSI network layer and the OSI appliation layer
structure) for different reasons, which should both be obvious.

/mtr