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

"Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Thu, 06 February 2020 00:24 UTC

Return-Path: <jmh@joelhalpern.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 A0DFC12001E for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 16:24:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.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 7q3nRAIpmqFz for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 16:24:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from maila2.tigertech.net (maila2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.152]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C438C12007C for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 16:24:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48CfLs55rpz6GD4n; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 16:24:21 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1580948661; bh=Dlk3hEPmegbZ4CJ+HL9fRt4xDUov1pbgrUSc4FAhKXY=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=Wt7mcy9gdNjMuTeA8nFI7TpZ2aQO5JPHrx/DnnChPhnSmeExqNwhpBdAYQFGB5UUw GaIvFRONSY0mWFR8zKpp/PGeSbCz0mxGm6zy0mW8yLQ/bg8o5wuOHMD65l4Am/QD4J sWUTXdZXmwElqZ68ZibXmLlr9K5QSbXC+Ll+Tk1o=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at a2.tigertech.net
Received: from [192.168.128.43] (209-255-163-147.ip.mcleodusa.net [209.255.163.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by maila2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 48CfLs1894z6GD4m; Wed, 5 Feb 2020 16:24:20 -0800 (PST)
To: architecture-discuss@ietf.org, iab@iab.org
References: <158094293707.31222.730373457433066701.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
From: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Message-ID: <deaf2366-b835-5ed5-48f3-6303b1836d7b@joelhalpern.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Feb 2020 19:24:19 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <158094293707.31222.730373457433066701.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/ylO9dLUX0WYO_N91H2kkeOirsFc>
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: Thu, 06 Feb 2020 00:24:25 -0000

I find this document very frustrating.

The explicit recommendations seem reasonable.

But the underlying tone that the End User concerns should take 
precedence over everything else seems to be incorrect.  And therefore 
the initial tone seems to send the wrong message.

To provide several examples, the Internet is "for" many participants. 
It is for the folks offering services over the Internet.  It is for the 
many sensors and small devices which are expected to outnumber human 
users by a significant margin in the near term.  It is "for" the folks 
who run it, as if they can not operate the network then it won't do 
anyone else any good.

I believe many of these concerns were raised by other people during 
earlier discussions of the document.  Assuming efforts were made to 
address those concerns, the changes seem to me to be insufficient.

Yours,
Joel

On 2/5/2020 5:48 PM, IAB Executive Administrative Manager wrote:
> This is an announcement of an IETF-wide Call for Comment on
> draft-iab-for-the-users-02.
> 
> The document is being considered for publication as an Informational RFC
> within the IAB stream, and is available for inspection at:
> <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-iab-for-the-users/>
> 
> The Call for Comment will last until 2020-03-04. Please send comments to
> architecture-discuss@ietf.org and iab@iab.org.
> 
> Abstract:
> 
>     This document explains why the IAB believes the IETF should consider
>     end users as its highest priority concern, and how that can be done.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> IETF-Announce mailing list
> IETF-Announce@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
>