Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF

Fernando Gont <> Thu, 25 February 2021 20:12 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id C59F73A1FAD; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 12:12:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nWisjCzqB5pY; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 12:12:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D4273A1F54; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 12:12:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2800:810:464:2b9:a449:5f08:346f:44bd] (unknown [IPv6:2800:810:464:2b9:a449:5f08:346f:44bd]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A4F35280615; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 20:12:25 +0000 (UTC)
To: "Salz, Rich" <>, "" <>, "" <>
References: <> <> <> <> <LO2P265MB057322BA95B1B44D4175356BC29E9@LO2P265MB0573.GBRP265.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <> <> <> <>
From: Fernando Gont <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2021 17:09:43 -0300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: General Area Dispatch <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2021 20:12:43 -0000

On 25/2/21 16:48, Salz, Rich wrote:
>> If a WG somewhat requires use of github, then the barrier is
>> there.
> Since no person, or no WG, has infinite resources, almost any
> attempts to engage some people mean that some others feel left out.
> (Note the almost)

Why do you think git/github will engage somebody that would otherwise 
not be engaged?

> The IETF still maintains that no matter how git/GitHub are used, the
> classic mechanisms of email, etc., still must be used.

When discussions end up spread over gihub and email lists, that's not a 
nice feature, IMO.

> Does that mean
> some conversations aren't fully discussed on the email, and some
> people feel left out? Yes.  Some people also dislike MIME email,

I use the least common denominator: plain text email.

Still most email clients will mangle patches sent via email -- which 
happens to be the normal workflow some projects such as the linux kernel 
and openbsd -- so at least for those things you'll probably resort to 
mutt or the like.

> and
> the moving away from IPv4 and FTP.  Things change.  For myself, I am
> just glad that we're not commenting on things via SMS.  I am tempted
> to create an OnlyFans account for ACME or HTTPAPI, tho. :)

My take is: if the tool improves your workflow, go for it. If it will 
get in the way, don't.

Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks
PGP Fingerprint: 6666 31C6 D484 63B2 8FB1 E3C4 AE25 0D55 1D4E 7492