Re: [arch-d] Call for Comment: <draft-iab-for-the-users-02> (The Internet is for End Users)

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Fri, 07 February 2020 09:01 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@cisco.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 1D2AE12018D for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Feb 2020 01:01:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.501
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.501 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 n4MOAQwgkoph for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 7 Feb 2020 01:01:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EDE6C120170 for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 7 Feb 2020 01:01:33 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=8757; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1581066094; x=1582275694; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc: to:references; bh=j1TH/0ups5YGZhEqm6P/I8GQ7OQgWSsXrstFV1YywRs=; b=RgPxlByOqJEnZ2WaAb1+saeqzBDGu7htCakXK1Qk63XCC3WQ/mgdjXCm aSfG7PtGJZ7rm9SA8axLxfvPTOzatslX3zVvqFTiRFMxZojTjB1qy7meU CA2nXJad+kbC2gj22amAQoEzqnnpIJcYVXtdtYWAwNHylYQTnwsXamDWb E=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0BfAABLJj1e/xbLJq1mGwEBAQEBAQE?= =?us-ascii?q?FAQEBEQEBAwMBAQGBagMBAQELAYEkU4EdVCESKo0Yh38liWKJTogLCQEBAQw?= =?us-ascii?q?BASMMAQGEQAKCZDcGDgIDDQEBBAEBAQIBBQRthTcMhWYBAQEBAgEdXAULCxg?= =?us-ascii?q?uITYGE4MmAYJKAw4gD61ZgieFSoJvDYIaBoE4AYw8ggCBEScMFIJMPoIbSQE?= =?us-ascii?q?BAgGFJIIsBK8nRIJEgk6EfIpRhCsbmwuXToIojGCDLwIEBgUCFYFoIz6BGjM?= =?us-ascii?q?aCBsVZQGBWWg+EhgNjlWIT4VAQAMwAo5PAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="5.70,412,1574121600"; d="scan'208,217"; a="23063631"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-2.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 07 Feb 2020 09:01:32 +0000
Received: from ams3-vpn-dhcp5100.cisco.com (ams3-vpn-dhcp5100.cisco.com [10.61.83.235]) by aer-core-2.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 01791Vw5002971 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 7 Feb 2020 09:01:31 GMT
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
Message-Id: <70F445A3-CECF-4696-990D-0EA804BF962C@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_546AB957-36BE-4227-A0C9-945F87555E39"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.60.0.2.5\))
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2020 10:01:31 +0100
In-Reply-To: <1c0861ff-cd59-1c43-6aa9-76e369128115@gmail.com>
Cc: architecture-discuss@ietf.org, iab@iab.org
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
References: <158094293707.31222.730373457433066701.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <1c0861ff-cd59-1c43-6aa9-76e369128115@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.60.0.2.5)
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 10.61.83.235, ams3-vpn-dhcp5100.cisco.com
X-Outbound-Node: aer-core-2.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/avzEyZQJxgQWuCvuzZKYV2EXetU>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] Call for Comment: <draft-iab-for-the-users-02> (The Internet is for End Users)
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: Fri, 07 Feb 2020 09:01:36 -0000

Hi Brian,

> On 7 Feb 2020, at 02:13, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I think the second sentence is a highly debatable assertion. Apart from
> anything else, I thought it was the ISOC's job, in the accepted division
> of labour according to BCP11.: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2028#section-3.4 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2028#section-3.4>
> But equally important, I think we have good reason to believe that the
> people who typically participate in the IETF are not the right sort of
> people to engage usefully in dialogue about "political, social and economic
> concerns". I think we will only burn our fingers.


While that may be true, the IETF cannot just stuff this stuff off to the ISOC.  If work being taken on has societal consequences, the IETF should be aware of them, and better to have the impacted people represent their concerns themselves through direct participation in IETF processes, rather than ISOC attempting to proxy for them.

Eliot