IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Add] Proposed charter and BoF request for IETF 106

Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Wed, 09 October 2019 14:41 UTC

Return-Path: <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
X-Original-To: add@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: add@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 132AC120110 for <add@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 07:41:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 3WLN0lhfXFwU for <add@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 07:41:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from p130.piuha.net (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:1829::130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4148312010E for <add@ietf.org>; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 07:41:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BD83660169; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 17:41:16 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from p130.piuha.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (p130.piuha.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id dv56nVeSupHa; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 17:41:14 +0300 (EEST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (p130.piuha.net [IPv6:2001:14b8:1829::130]) by p130.piuha.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 86DE66600AF; Wed, 9 Oct 2019 17:41:14 +0300 (EEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
From: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAL02cgR_61TNnPy=ios+hQFs_tjfYNXu-sBpbDL-HBY+QsY40A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 16:41:13 +0200
Cc: add@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <B5991A18-B00D-4E77-9993-705141931844@piuha.net>
References: <CALaySJLxXVuHQNfTnaeKZ_R9xtBYWfbta+A1bWcE-ZQZwd3VZg@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBMkAFZW9mWjw92v+OR0Fa8ed+P80yc78eY07hCpsCNY6Q@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBOOq4FHVoxsyApzOc4VtTbMwZn7858-E+4kr21Z0r5wrA@mail.gmail.com> <CAL02cgR_61TNnPy=ios+hQFs_tjfYNXu-sBpbDL-HBY+QsY40A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/add/k84NZeCoCLevKGhxcsTBqWDZcio>
Subject: Re: [Add] Proposed charter and BoF request for IETF 106
X-BeenThere: add@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Applications Doing DNS <add.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/add>, <mailto:add-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/add/>
List-Post: <mailto:add@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:add-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/add>, <mailto:add-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2019 14:41:19 -0000

Richard,

I realise that it is easier to ignore the deployment models. And I don’t imagine that we’d have unanimous opinion about deployment models. Certainly the NSAs of the world and few others that have very specific deployments depend on benefits from centralised models :-) But, should that drive IETF opinion on an important change in Internet infrastructure. 

I wouldn’t entirely rule out broader IETF rough consensus on what’s good. We could find out, perhaps.

And I think we should care about pervasive monitoring, in this and other topics.

Jari

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email