Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "paper"
Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> Tue, 28 April 2020 22:22 UTC
Return-Path: <eckert@i4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
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 F071E3A0105 for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 15:22:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.869
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.869 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 OS9QcOd8kOjQ for <architecture-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 15:22:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [IPv6:2001:638:a000:4134::ffff:40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0AD63A00C1 for <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Apr 2020 15:22:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.52]) by faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1623548048; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 00:22:19 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 10463) id A5CFD440041; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 00:22:19 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 00:22:19 +0200
From: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
To: Ian Peter <ian.peter@ianpeter.com>
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, architecture-discuss@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20200428222219.GQ62020@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
References: <20200428190608.GN62020@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <d85b5fbc-0379-602d-7c9b-fabfd9cdac58@gmail.com> <20200428211737.GP62020@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <emde06c4fa-b2c1-418c-9f5d-50e5a28bbe6c@desktop-rub0n2r>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <emde06c4fa-b2c1-418c-9f5d-50e5a28bbe6c@desktop-rub0n2r>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/architecture-discuss/zO6S_3EA6xCWkN5sEJJiFdp28dI>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "paper"
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: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 22:22:33 -0000
Thanks, Ian As said in my mail, i think it would be appropriate to how i understood the spirit of IETF/ISOC to have the ability for a public/open discussion about the subject matter, so the non-public feedback channel and the use of a lists where its unclear how to even join it is quite frustrating, and it would be great if this could be fixed. As said in response to Brian, maybe a better solution would be to create some group like "internet-future" at the isoc mail server. In any case, for a "discussion" paper as this one, it would be great to point to an actual forum where the discussion can be had. Cheers Toerless On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 09:58:57PM +0000, Ian Peter wrote: > Toerless, > > The internetpolicy list in question was dormant for decades, but came to > life again a few months ago with a substantial discussion on the issues > surrounding ISOC's proposed sale of Public Internet Registry (PIR) . It's > fair to say a lot of this discussion was very critical of ISOC's position, > sometimes quite undiplomatically so. Perhaps some restrictions were placed > on new memberships in these circumstances? I do not know... > > The "new IP" proposal was posted there a couple of days ago. To date it has > not provoked much discussion, just a couple of comments equating this with > the OSI battles 30 years ago. Perhaps more substantial comment will come in > the near future. > > Ian Peter > > > > > > > > ------ Original Message ------ > From: "Toerless Eckert" <tte@cs.fau.de> > To: "Brian E Carpenter" <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> > Cc: architecture-discuss@ietf.org > Sent: 29/04/2020 7:17:37 AM > Subject: Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "paper" > > > Thanks, Brian, inline > > > > On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 08:34:53AM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > > > Hi Toerless, > > > > > > On one point only: > > > > > > > internetpolicy@elists.isoc.org does not allow Global ISOC members to > > > > join by themselves, nor do i know if it would welcome discussion. > > > > In fact it is not even listed on the set of pubic ISOC mailing lists. > > > > So the nature of this mailing list seems to be secret to me. > > > > > > You can join but not in the normal way... you have to go through a > > > strange procedure in the Member's Portal or some such place, where I > > > believe it's called a "Community" or some such. Can't remember, but it > > > was very baroque. > > > > Yes, i tried to exhaust my options in there, but got nowhere, > > this includes going to > > > > https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/internetpolicy/ > > > > and attempting to join via that unpublished link. > > > > I don't mind baroque as long as its published, but published information > > is wrong, and the fact that the list is not included in the published > > list of ISOC lists makes me wonder if the list lists that are only > > accessible to ISOC members is even published anywhere... > > > > I did send emails to support. > > > > > I believe Andrew said that there is work underway to change this. > > > > I did have a bit of discussion about the possibility of > > a list like "internet-future@elists.isoc.org, but was told in PM > > that getting new mailing lists on elists.isoc.org is a > > process competing with continental drift in speed. > > > > Something like such a list would be a great option IMHO for > > the ISOC society to participate on not only in discussions about > > internet history but also its future. > > > > > However, I don't see any relevant discussion in the (members only) > > > archive. Typical subjects recently: > > > > > > on people not heard (was Re: Language reversion, and an idea) > > > OneWeb bankruptcy > > > Interview with Parminder on community ownership of data > > > Official de-chartering of the Internet Society Ireland Chapter > > > North-South issues in the Ditigal Economy > > > European Commission solicits feedback on GDPR's efficiency > > > Official de-chartering of the Internet Society Ireland Chapter > > > > Given how seemingly non-published internetpolicy mailing list is, > > i wonder who is even subscribed to it. Not sure if it is possible > > to figure that out. I very much liked Jay Daleys reconfirmation > > that IETF mailing list membership is of public nature. Not sure > > what ISOC's policy is. > > > > Cheers > > Toerless > > > > > Regards > > > Brian > > > > -- > > --- > > tte@cs.fau.de > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Architecture-discuss mailing list > > Architecture-discuss@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/architecture-discuss
- [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "paper" Toerless Eckert
- Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "p… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "p… Toerless Eckert
- Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "p… Ian Peter
- Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "p… Toerless Eckert
- Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "p… John Levine
- Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "p… Olaf Kolkman
- Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "p… Olaf Kolkman
- Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "p… Andrew Campling
- Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "p… Toerless Eckert
- Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "p… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "p… John Grant
- Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "p… Andrew Campling
- Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "p… Stephen Farrell
- Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "p… John Grant
- Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "p… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "p… Guntur Wiseno Putra
- Re: [arch-d] FYI: "ISOC" "New IP" "discussion" "p… Andrew Sullivan