[gaia] Review required: draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments

"Jose Saldana" <jsaldana@unizar.es> Tue, 08 March 2016 08:26 UTC

Return-Path: <jsaldana@unizar.es>
X-Original-To: gaia@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gaia@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BD6F12D547 for <gaia@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Mar 2016 00:26:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.522
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ygOfSVM8jgoW for <gaia@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Mar 2016 00:26:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from huecha.unizar.es (huecha.unizar.es [155.210.1.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6535112D537 for <gaia@irtf.org>; Tue, 8 Mar 2016 00:26:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from usuarioPC (gtc1pc12.cps.unizar.es [155.210.158.17]) (authenticated bits=0) by huecha.unizar.es (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id u288PiVY005519; Tue, 8 Mar 2016 09:25:50 +0100
From: "Jose Saldana" <jsaldana@unizar.es>
To: "'Niels ten Oever'" <niels@article19.org>
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2016 09:25:43 +0100
Message-ID: <003101d17914$247b6b30$6d724190$@unizar.es>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0032_01D1791C.86409680"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0
Thread-Index: AdF5ExXIPs8qUA0mRF6H7If8I/xC5A==
Content-Language: es
X-Mail-Scanned: Criba 2.0 + Clamd & Bogofilter
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gaia/g1Upbnz9-bBimzvOaP2fUB_cnJc>
Cc: gaia@irtf.org
Subject: [gaia] Review required: draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments
X-BeenThere: gaia@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Global Access to the Internet for All <gaia.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/gaia>, <mailto:gaia-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gaia/>
List-Post: <mailto:gaia@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gaia-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia>, <mailto:gaia-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2016 08:26:24 -0000

Hi Niels,

According to your review, we have built a new version of the draft. We have not uploaded it yet to the IETF web page.

This e-mail contains three attachments:

- These are your general comments, and our responses: General_Comments_Review_Niels.txt

- These are the detailed comments ([JS] means Jose Saldana), added to your review (marked with "#"): draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments-03 edit NtO_JS2.txt

- And this would be the new version of the draft: draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments-03c.txt


Thank you very much!

Jose

> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: gaia [mailto:gaia-bounces@irtf.org] En nombre de Niels ten Oever
> Enviado el: martes, 02 de febrero de 2016 18:11
> Para: Jose Saldana <jsaldana@unizar.es>es>; gaia@irtf.org
> CC: 'Javier Simó' <javier.simo@urjc.es>es>; irsg@irtf.org
> Asunto: Re: [gaia] [irsg] Review required: draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-
> deployments
> 
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
> 
> Hi Jose,
> 
> Thanks for this. Reply inline:
> 
> On 02/02/2016 01:44 PM, Jose Saldana wrote:
> > Dear Niels,
> >
> > First of all, thank you very much for your detailed review. As said
> > today, your comments will be useful for building an improved version.
> >
> 
> My pleasure!
> 
> 
> > But I think here is something we should decide now: what to do
> > about "deployment experiences", i.e. point 4 of your review.
> >
> >>>>> 4. It could perhaps be interesting to provide some
> >>>>> additional information on actual alternative network
> >>>>> deployments, perhaps by providing some case studies and,
> >>>>> on the basis of these, a set of best practices /
> >>>>> recommendations for specific situations.
> >
> > As Javier says, we have discussed this possibility in the GAIA
> > meeting in Prague
> > (https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/93/minutes/minutes-93-gaia):
> >
> > "Lixia Zhang: The Internet didn’t start as a community effort. On
> > the draft, what is the main purpose? I’m interested in what you
> > have learned, and what advice you may have.
> >
> > Niels ten Oever: This is a great overview, but how will you set
> > boundaries. There are lots of handbook materials that could be
> > linked to, to avoid making this draft grow to 100s of pages. In
> > particular we could define more on centralised v. decentralised
> > approaches.
> >
> > Jane Coffin: Energy is also important for rural areas.
> >
> > Mat: I think the original motivation was to get a definition of
> > “Alternative Networks”, it’s not scoped to be 100s of pages, but
> > more can we define what we mean as Alternative Networks, and then
> > provide examples. Lixia’s suggestion of looking at learning
> > outcomes, could be a future document that may be useful."
> >
> >
> > We also talked about that in the list, and we (more or less)
> > agreed on this solution: to first focus on a "taxonomy" draft, and
> > leave "deployment experiences" for future work.
> > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gaia/current/msg00831.html
> >
> > In fact, we already removed some content from the draft, as it was
> > related to "deployment experiences". See parts removed from Section
> > 4 in these two versions:
> > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-
> deployments-01&url2=draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments-00
> >
> >
> >
> And we have also asked for volunteers for the "deployment
> > experiences" draft:
> > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gaia/current/msg00916.html
> >
> >
> > So my opinion is that we should avoid including this in the
> > present document. As you said in Prague, it is a matter of defining
> > some boundaries on the scope of the document. What do you think?
> >
> 
> I would leave that for the authors and the group to decide. But AFAIK
> there are a few major deployments / projects out there, such as
> Freifunk (Germany), Guifi (Catalunia), Rhizomatica (Mexico), and
> perhaps Commotion (Tunisia, Redhook, Congo). Referencing these could
> bring the draft closer to actual practices (and with that increase
> relevance). Another approach could be providing a concrete example for
> every topology you define under 4.
> 
> I completely agree with you that deployment experiences should not go
> into this draft, that would be too much. The same is true for
> providing an exhaustive list of implementations.
> 
> > Thanks in advance,
> 
> Hope this helps,
> 
> Niels
> 
> >
> > Jose
> >
> >
> >> -----Mensaje original----- De: gaia
> >> [mailto:gaia-bounces@irtf.org] En nombre de Javier Simó Enviado
> >> el: lunes, 01 de febrero de 2016 14:09 Para: gaia@irtf.org
> >> Asunto: Re: [gaia] [irsg] Review required:
> >> draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network- deployments
> >>
> >> For the most important points (the most detailed ones), there are
> >> a few good interdisciplinary people in this lists with a
> >> background in development studies. I guess that it is just a
> >> matter of these people polishing the text.
> >>
> >> For point 4, ... well, the decission after Prague was to TAKE
> >> OUT the experiences and build another document. If experiences
> >> are required in here, then, we should reverse that decission and
> >> pilot a controlled introduction of best practices / case studies
> >> in the appropriate subsections.
> >>
> >> Best Javier
> >>
> >> El 01/02/16 a las 13:58, Jose Saldana escribió:
> >>> Thank you very much, Niels!
> >>>
> >>> We will take your comments into account in order to build an
> >>> improved version of
> >> the draft.
> >>>
> >>> Best regards,
> >>>
> >>> Jose
> >>>
> >>>> -----Mensaje original----- De: gaia
> >>>> [mailto:gaia-bounces@irtf.org] En nombre de Mat Ford Enviado
> >>>>  el: lunes, 01 de febrero de 2016 13:27 Para: Niels ten
> >>>> Oever <niels@article19.org>rg>;
> >>>> draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network- deployments@ietf.org CC:
> >>>> gaia <gaia@irtf.org>rg>; Internet Research Steering Group
> >>>> <irsg@irtf.org> Asunto: Re: [gaia] [irsg] Review required:
> >>>> draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network- deployments
> >>>>
> >>>> Thanks very much for the detailed review Niels, it is
> >>>> valuable.
> >>>>
> >>>> Authors - please discuss how you would like to address these
> >>>> comments and let Niels and myself know. If there is a need
> >>>> for further discussion, please let’s keep that on
> >>>> gaia@irtf.org.
> >>>>
> >>>> Mat
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 30 Jan 2016, at 23:35, Niels ten Oever
> >>>>> <niels@article19.org> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Dear all,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Please find my review of
> >>>>> https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deploy
> me
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> nt s-03.txt below. This is my first IRSG review, so please bear with
> >>>>> me.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I mostly followed
> >>>>> https://wiki.tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5743#section-2.2 and
> >>>>> academic review practices, but please let me know where I
> >>>>> might have misstepped.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I hope this is useful.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 0. The topic of the draft is very relevant and timely and
> >>>>> brings together many different angles that are needed to
> >>>>> address the multidisciplinary nature of access, the
> >>>>> Internet, and community owned
> >> networks.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1. The issue of the digital divide is approached from a
> >>>>> 'development studies' paradigm (e.g. developing
> >>>>> countries), quite some scientific literature has been
> >>>>> published about this topic. Most current literature
> >>>>> acknowledges that for instance term 'developing country' is
> >>>>> problematic because it assumes that all countries are on a
> >>>>> similar trajectory, from 'underdeveloped' to 'western'.
> >>>>> Empirical data shows that this is not the case. More
> >>>>> accurate would be to address differential developmental
> >>>>> trajectories by referring to the Global North vs. the
> >>>>> Global South, or using other frames.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Also terms like 'Digital Divide', 'Data Revolution',
> >>>>> 'Information Society' as well as the 'WSIS process' have
> >>>>> been dissected, discussed and interpreted in quite a
> >>>>> variety of ways. it might be good to engage with the
> >>>>> literature on this if you would like to use these terms,
> >>>>> and if so, refer to the relevant sources.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Same is true for the method or model of knowledge transfer
> >>>>> that is mentioned in the draft. At several places it is
> >>>>> implied that knowledge travels from North to South and
> >>>>> from Urban to Rural, which might be a one dimensional way
> >>>>> of representing a quite multifaceted process of technology
> >>>>> appropriation and development.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In terms of methodology: you are clearly coming at this
> >>>>> problem from a multidisciplinary approach. Which is great,
> >>>>> considering the multidisciplinary nature of the Internet
> >>>>> and the problem you are addressing. However, if you do
> >>>>> decide to use concepts from different fields and
> >>>>> disciplines (like for instance urban and rural from urban
> >>>>> planning, demand and provision from economics or the
> >>>>> digital divide from sociology) it is important to make this
> >>>>> explicit. I would suggest adding a sub-section in which you
> >>>>> explain how you built your multidisciplinary research
> >>>>> method and why you use the concepts you applied.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2. There is a lot of doubling between abstract and
> >>>>> introduction. I recommend reducing the abstract.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 3. The discussion under point 1. and 2. is maybe not
> >>>>> necessary for achieving the goal of providing a a taxonomy
> >>>>> of alternative network deployments. However, Maybe the
> >>>>> first part could be shorter.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 4. It could perhaps be interesting to provide some
> >>>>> additional information on actual alternative network
> >>>>> deployments, perhaps by providing some case studies and,
> >>>>> on the basis of these, a set of best practices /
> >>>>> recommendations for specific situations.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> In the attached file more inline editorial comments and
> >>>>> suggestions are provided.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Best,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Niels
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Article 19 www.article19.org
> >>>>>
> >>>>> PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2
> >>>>> 636D 68E9
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Niels ten Oever Head of Digital
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Article 19 www.article19.org
> >>>>>
> >>>>> PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2
> >>>>> 636D 68E9
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 01/14/2016 12:39 PM, Mat Ford wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi folks,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The GAIA RG has successfully concluded an RG Last Call
> >>>>>> for the document
> >>>>>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-net
> wo
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> rk
> >>>>>>> -deployments/
> >>>>>> As document shepherd I’m now looking for someone from
> >>>>>> the IRSG to review
> >>>> the document. Any volunteers?
> >>>>>> If no one volunteers, Lisandro Granville is top of the
> >>>>>> list:
> >>>>>> https://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/irtf/trac/wiki/IRSGReviewLog
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> Mat
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> <draft-irtf-gaia-alternative-network-deployments-03 edit
> >>>>> NtO.txt>
> >>>> _______________________________________________ gaia mailing
> >>>> list gaia@irtf.org
> >>>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________ gaia mailing
> >>> list gaia@irtf.org https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> --------------------------------------------------- Fco. Javier
> >> Simó Reigadas <javier.simo@urjc.es> Subdirector de Ord. Docente
> >> ETS de Ingeniería de Telecomunicación D-204, Departamental III
> >> Camino Del Molino, s/n - 28943 Fuenlabrada (Madrid) Tel:
> >> 914888428, Fax: 914887500 Web personal:
> >> http://www.tsc.urjc.es/~javier.simo
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________ gaia mailing list
> >>  gaia@irtf.org https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia
> >
> >
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2
> 
> iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWsOMwAAoJEAi1oPJjbWjp0igIAI0GkDWZmcvgKSujx+tPhl
> hg
> 3n4Zmrqbc1Ez8kBVbHT2iv15D2FccCOJy9FILZ7sIyk1VWtEyG4zfKU/wYBQQay
> z
> XRgH+6Ix5ovhinx8dcH3eQMdq8OLWf43Oe4I3E2Kc5F/Pq5O12Lhb8NMa74ZBW
> VN
> KxZGo2xyeVsA4jjUSfXiiq2xAyaM7SEFDMUFSjV4qOsJUChmXSaRx27z+FpiCm
> 5G
> KGYG3w5lvBs5vsnqHhzZkpsW706NFZDuJqpIX3yNmzNUCQBhkHmhPiMsXQBu
> eVlf
> mN6RVGIDDzgV744ktUvG2zTNa+YTJb382kelp7xsDq7yFPGTFkaFV/bVImMQLf
> M=
> =eGYs
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gaia mailing list
> gaia@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/gaia