Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discussion (was: Re: [Chirp] Fwd: IETF 107 Vancouver In-Person Meeting Cancelled)

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Fri, 03 April 2020 23:41 UTC

Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20200403100227.11c1caf0@elandnews.com>
Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2020 16:36:43 -0700
To: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>, architecture-discuss@iab.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <20200403151115.GU28965@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
References: <158386742797.16091.1025684270011519738@ietfa.amsl.com> <efbf8fd0-4673-3a93-2add-6bbc6ff0dca9@cs.tcd.ie> <a5046b41-b44e-d292-e0da-da6ec6d599ad@cs.tcd.ie> <20200402152717.GK28965@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <7de683b6-172b-7e7b-e043-d241804eaa42@nomountain.net> <20200402193430.GQ28965@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <17c21324-4238-9e56-48f2-e6df51967ca2@nomountain.net> <20200403010512.GS28965@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <6.2.5.6.2.20200403042829.11c2a9e0@elandnews.com> <20200403151115.GU28965@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/rlZ8YR3dWb6l3ZCD0w9ESKeKH4A>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discussion (was: Re: [Chirp] Fwd: IETF 107 Vancouver In-Person Meeting Cancelled)
Precedence: list

Hi Toerless,
At 08:11 AM 03-04-2020, Toerless Eckert wrote:
>Right now i have to find and use non-ietf tools to avoid not being
>in violation with whatever unwritten IETF policy there is. I found
>these for etherpad, i can pay for webex, it becomes of course annoying
>with jabber and wiki.
>
>I am mostly annoyed by the IMHO illogical nature of the current IESG
>position that making tooling available, and therefore encouraging
>more informal discussions in the community is the same as endorsing
>the payload of that discussion. Especially given how it only applies
>to the electronic tooling, not the physcial one (rooms).

It has been a while since I looked at the meeting room "policy".  I 
am not sure whether it was formalized or whether it is from some 
discussions about such meetings.  I could argue that it should be 
formalized but then I am not sure whether that would be a good 
idea.  Anyway, that does not solve the problem which you described 
above.  IASA could allow a requester to use idle resources for 
informal discussions.  It would be good if the informality is not 
debatable.  For example, would you ask me to sign a "blue sheet" if 
we have a discussion in the hallway?

>Just to be sure my points are not conflated:

Ok.

>In the absence of U.S. export restrictions, i would be making
>exactly the same arguments here wrt. to the problems of doing
>architecture work in the IETF and the need for using inofficial
>side-meetings to make technical progress on things not currently
>well supported by established official IETF structures. I would
>just leave out the "dangerous" part.
>
>EAR 734.7 does not distinguish between official or inofficial
>meetings, it just talks about published/public exclusions to the
>scope of the EAR and hence the applicability of the entity list.
>So, if you follow the words of the regulation, inofficial
>side-meetings are as much or as little of a workaround as
>any other IETF or other SDO meetings are.
>
>IMHO, whatever the type of meeting is, the main risk is the
>one of selective investigation and prosecution, something where of course
>Futurewei has to be a lot more concerned about than any other
>company.

I would not look at it as a matter of which entity would be a lot 
more concerned about.  It is better if that does not turn into a 
concern for the other entity.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

[arch-d] on the nature of architecture discussion… Toerless Eckert
Re: [arch-d] [Chirp] on the nature of architectur… Stephen Farrell
Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discus… Jari Arkko
Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discus… Toerless Eckert
Re: [arch-d] [Chirp] on the nature of architectur… Toerless Eckert
Re: [arch-d] [Chirp] on the nature of architectur… Stephen Farrell
Re: [arch-d] [Chirp] on the nature of architectur… Toerless Eckert
Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discus… Melinda Shore
Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discus… Toerless Eckert
Re: [arch-d] [Chirp] on the nature of architectur… Brian E Carpenter
Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discus… Melinda Shore
Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discus… tony.li
Re: [arch-d] [Chirp] on the nature of architectur… Toerless Eckert
Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discus… John Levine
Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discus… Toerless Eckert
Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discus… Stephen Farrell
Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discus… Hutchison, David
Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discus… Stewart Bryant
Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discus… S Moonesamy
Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discus… Toerless Eckert
Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discus… Toerless Eckert
Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discus… S Moonesamy
Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discus… Bob Briscoe
Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discus… Stewart Bryant
Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discus… Joseph Touch
Re: [arch-d] on the nature of architecture discus… Toerless Eckert