IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [arch-d] possible new IAB programme on Internet resilience

Scott Brim <scott.brim@gmail.com> Sat, 28 December 2019 23:45 UTC

Return-Path: <scott.brim@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29F731200B6 for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 28 Dec 2019 15:45:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.997
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.997 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 k7wP0d8lf49r for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 28 Dec 2019 15:45:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ot1-x333.google.com (mail-ot1-x333.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::333]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F00B9120018 for <architecture-discuss@iab.org>; Sat, 28 Dec 2019 15:45:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ot1-x333.google.com with SMTP id k8so24187577otl.13 for <architecture-discuss@iab.org>; Sat, 28 Dec 2019 15:45:18 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=Wi25T8xCvrf33LL/ZnZXrfhe6cGZgLWSQdAQfEryFYY=; b=bf0QvfGp3lYVrAPwCeNcq5ee84yFss16ErqX0jZyHdCSAkR9JkPEW9BcwibKWIXCpn k7o9eX+6MLn6hb5Sp2ZD7Fsr9+zWyQ04i7WUTmb4AkKtQC6e9i7EG+G65Bo/g1seARGl RE48F2XzqYDNDgjplA474DtzHtYZoky2R5D/Tm+aOVPC5sTJ6e50uaLLRjou4UvnBDZM wOQsKg3+/Z0QaiRHeclVFKEOjslipb2eLlsUKArzDLQvf/tUzf1RHmfohL2gpSfZ3wDJ BSEEZqnJw+0Mr6Y86pFkxHE8CzQOkS+8NcYAoq/rcET7auhjF6IuBCPLTu45LJ51jm5X MFOw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=Wi25T8xCvrf33LL/ZnZXrfhe6cGZgLWSQdAQfEryFYY=; b=JZ9c9/M6Ysye4GMnuvKSTU3skkbNn8uisxoMze9VGdbTyZVBdHTV8i3dQStDk3PL45 NLwEqarW2DkvKLD4aV5salkb9+rnxC5YQoLjVwRCWPyzYy3rVkb6+h/oNpIPQwBFpJnH J2FmCQiuHfyjDgRqLquU/Eq/D3nhqt/Duo9CpP1udhIvE10KCIrpiydyRE46RJsr1Hq6 aEBvFYk7m/kd//gpUr19CJEXibM2GFmqHeU6KUyHZH6cBo0OGBieaiW1JczetRQhzlkI bLwuWrSTha9j4L/7Tsr1MELRErkDX8+Duo/e9/NyDrzmJRzs+jwgg+kYGX+uoAIoFNNM lcaw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAV8fWfDoL2CNV0hOKmndgjqSy56iO6PAyVXODWK1gDqSELABJNh /q5UBrRPuxPmT8ltnWcfyg+hDMP3rWS8EMAyV7SqTq0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxrjXLjGqRmK3D28Mbz7aeOgSMP2dzxPfwo6ElL++BWo/W6GDGumg+jtdnAbTqEmQE+BMplvU/BLaVsB5VXrJs=
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:53c4:: with SMTP id i4mr54349722oth.48.1577576717988; Sat, 28 Dec 2019 15:45:17 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <f13e1588-35e0-2493-93d2-add3480bb207@cs.tcd.ie> <1127343564.5806.1577112317584@appsuite-gw1.open-xchange.com> <ebcca2be-6839-8f43-d74f-0e863e32cd2d@cs.tcd.ie> <2068147434.6516.1577178675917@appsuite-gw1.open-xchange.com> <LO2P265MB05733E4BD5A72EDEF96D3DE2C2290@LO2P265MB0573.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <6.2.5.6.2.20191227130815.120fc690@elandnews.com> <LO2P265MB0573E1B462A3804525BB2646C2250@LO2P265MB0573.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <2CA4CBDC-CAB0-4E02-BC4C-40DF67FB64BC@tony.li> <LO2P265MB05733F3BE310F2B6DAFDA54FC2250@LO2P265MB0573.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <304321FD-CB1A-45FE-B67D-0C8ABA6F0BF5@frobbit.se>
In-Reply-To: <304321FD-CB1A-45FE-B67D-0C8ABA6F0BF5@frobbit.se>
From: Scott Brim <scott.brim@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2019 18:44:59 -0500
Message-ID: <CAPv4CP9nZXREJDu9bauseQ5DWsCv9vioYsRLirp25uqx+n=Nzg@mail.gmail.com>
To: architecture-discuss@iab.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000e1b7db059acc332d"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/PCWpEM_bRBllt6-E0ulvbkxqShQ>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] possible new IAB programme on Internet resilience
X-BeenThere: architecture-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: open discussion forum for long/wide-range architectural issues <architecture-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/architecture-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:architecture-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss>, <mailto:architecture-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 28 Dec 2019 23:45:21 -0000

On Sat, Dec 28, 2019 at 4:07 PM Patrik Fältström <paf=
40frobbit.se@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

> ICANN, ITU and many other processes are different. Very different.
>

First of all, yes -- and the ITU-T process attracts certain kinds of people
and certain kinds of goals, just as the IETF and ICANN do. This -- the
character of other organizations -- needs to be taken into account when
deciding whether the IETF can cede all policy decisions to others.

Second, historically the wiretap discussions were very significant in that
the IETF explicitly made a policy decision in the form of an engineering
decision. At least when I was active I believe the IETF considered policy
issues all the time, if only implicitly.

Scott

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email