From nobody Fri Aug 25 05:22:53 2023 Return-Path: X-Original-To: antitrust-policy@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: antitrust-policy@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A7DFC151066 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2023 05:22:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.908 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.908 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ietf-org.20221208.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FAvWo5jXyTnA for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2023 05:22:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ed1-x530.google.com (mail-ed1-x530.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::530]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFE9AC14CE2E for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2023 05:22:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ed1-x530.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-51cff235226so1978277a12.0 for ; Fri, 25 Aug 2023 05:22:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ietf-org.20221208.gappssmtp.com; s=20221208; t=1692966170; x=1693570970; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=iEgjboFwhcX8mMpk6+DsBjG+DqHF7L3cgM1oTGglDJw=; b=D5lu6i127z9C895ezhUMkj84VQlj0fJivd1y5MNbm7r4dI31YkePDXfjTHxaR4hcCj qYfyvJBl2A9+xJDeWbg26+4UCDeHOwgzwa19vvSkifPaGUEHbkYHvYenKk4WRgV5o6o+ cadIzDdxlKMMKptc8o2e77mVWAceb4YQivvmVaS9fWa/OyRyEsjkyYoERrTw56u+XJU5 hk+eHXh/lNVHS20MnDguHNV2BlTMb4xh7rxJjmKE4tpD1fJ38dtbcmOBl9n0IBrazION x2j3IYC2aMmOACS+ING2PNp5SnPZoK0SeIO3RQCzUZWO56/5m0yg/NeLOMd9ewChs1JY bsbg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1692966170; x=1693570970; h=references:to:cc:in-reply-to:date:subject:mime-version:message-id :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=iEgjboFwhcX8mMpk6+DsBjG+DqHF7L3cgM1oTGglDJw=; b=G4u/ytWp8+QWcgS/5kHdmfJORJiSR+5qjENJcQBGLvizolX50yxBd+Ckvl2jcAizlp fOZ7C8bPjUdIWBZX5ujIw0YPxtbwdZE5jMg2fOc/C53zaJZSZbnezhUAMfEgqMuu/ORS hK/V7cp6VxXbIAaxuOKkZIuhQYlIMwJUGH+C0KOchH66iWn+/zb+j8H3oEClO05SLiX5 VQz11cYkaiLoVavIqS0cdGP40cq9rnz1n17S0ZRmky1+VJzOqztnaoANKLecDzoQsPzh sTGnn6CuLhnwrO8EE32nGvE+gRKAJyG6oc6wBL6bxdyzYe99sMKUgUcLdTJG3jckNBAp fmXA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yz57OltXDONwYL3fcIu+2xpu7qGT0Bm4m8C7FEmKJXUrKcpCMvs FRJE7+8Kk75twJmZIYeZ14WuxA9n X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IH4O5QIwsTN4PwggSLNXCfHHPwGiW6tnJesRwHtxMudi19oguiy1+u80EN0R5R6HyCWe0kABg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:1d4c:b0:51f:ef58:da87 with SMTP id dz12-20020a0564021d4c00b0051fef58da87mr23899525edb.2.1692966169980; Fri, 25 Aug 2023 05:22:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtpclient.apple ([92.27.125.209]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e5-20020a056402148500b0052996528b81sm959698edv.45.2023.08.25.05.22.49 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 25 Aug 2023 05:22:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Jay Daley Message-Id: <926B38E2-DB7B-48A1-ABCE-098FC46D1E25@ietf.org> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_F87ED416-8289-4C3F-86A6-B20D925BC2BB" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.600.7\)) Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2023 13:22:38 +0100 In-Reply-To: Cc: "antitrust-policy@ietf.org" , Stephan Wenger , Alissa Cooper , Jorge Contreras , Brad Biddle To: Stephen Farrell References: <168901026560.7883.14919362245027450565@ietfa.amsl.com> <2AE74757-7A99-49EC-8CCF-615CCAB21B6C@ietf.org> <773FB56E-910A-4A74-975B-4D6D97837C23@cooperw.in> <49AF030C-5A32-4C82-91AA-E65F6FA853CA@ietf.org> <8DBD9C3E-2135-4D67-A01E-B2843726391F@cooperw.in> <2f06c146-42f8-f534-d181-121f7007cd35@joelhalpern.com> <628B9176-2E66-4D32-9049-F02513A5857E@ietf.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3731.600.7) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [antitrust-policy] New Version Notification for draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-06.txt X-BeenThere: antitrust-policy@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discuss the need for an antitrust or competition policy for the IETF." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2023 12:22:52 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_F87ED416-8289-4C3F-86A6-B20D925BC2BB Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 > On 25 Aug 2023, at 12:41, Stephen Farrell = wrote: >=20 >=20 > Hiya, >=20 > On 25/08/2023 11:31, Jay Daley wrote: >> * Using/unpublished/ market data to evaluate the relative >> implementation costs of/alternative technical proposals/ to decide >> whether one is significantly more feasible in the market and thus >> a better candidate for standardization. >=20 > FWIW, I don't think that's an improvement. We often > get reports that someone reports x% failures with a > new mechanism without them publishing the underlying > data, and we often do, and should, act on those if > they're credible (which they mostly are in my > experience). >=20 > Maybe the problem is the phrase "market data"? Is > that meant to include/exclude e.g. reports that > trials have found that a new TLS extension causes > some deployed implementations to misbehave? As I understand it, what you are describing is technical data, not = market data, which is commercial information (sales, prices, etc) but = I=E2=80=99m sure others will correct me if I=E2=80=99m wrong. Jay >=20 > Ta, > S. > --=20 Jay Daley IETF Executive Director exec-director@ietf.org --Apple-Mail=_F87ED416-8289-4C3F-86A6-B20D925BC2BB Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8

On 25 = Aug 2023, at 12:41, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> = wrote:


Hiya,

On = 25/08/2023 11:31, Jay Daley wrote:
 * = Using/unpublished/  market data to evaluate the = relative
implementation costs of/alternative technical proposals/ =  to decide
whether one is significantly more feasible in the = market and thus
a better candidate for = standardization.

FWIW, I don't think that's an = improvement. We often
get reports that someone reports x% failures = with a
new mechanism without them publishing the underlying
data, = and we often do, and should, act on those if
they're credible (which = they mostly are in my
experience).

Maybe the problem is the = phrase "market data"? Is
that meant to include/exclude e.g. reports = that
trials have found that a new TLS extension causes
some = deployed implementations to = misbehave?

As I = understand it, what you are describing is technical data, not market = data, which is commercial information (sales, prices, etc) but I=E2=80=99m= sure others will correct me if I=E2=80=99m = wrong.

Jay


Ta,
S.
<OpenPGP_0xE4D8E9F997A8= 33DD.asc>

-- 
Jay Daley
IETF Executive = Director
exec-director@ietf.org

= --Apple-Mail=_F87ED416-8289-4C3F-86A6-B20D925BC2BB--