Re: [Gendispatch] I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-03.txt

[Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>]

On 23/10/2022 23:39, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> It seems to me that you are making two arguments, one of which I think I
> agree with and
> one I do not.
> 
> As noted in my review, I think the language in the draft is overbroad, and
> I agree with
> you that discussing whether a specific technical choice tends to reinforce
> or reduce
> entry barriers should in fact be in scope.

Ack.

> 
> I disagree, however, with your argument that as an academic you don't need
> to
> avoid certain topics, because, as noted by mnot and others, the question
> is what conditions this creates for others. You are, of course, free to
> raise
> those topics in your own newsletter, Twitter, etc. but the question is what
> are appropriate topics for the IETF.

"As an academic" here is just an example. (A person working
for a small commercial entity ought be in a similar position, but I'll 
stick with the example of an academic.) I think it
ought be ok for an academic (without a CoI let's assume) to
discuss the market position of entities involved in the IETF
say when describing (potential) upcoming regulatory actions
or legislation.

In fact we had someone do more or less that when describing
the digital markets act recently. I would think that was v.
useful for IETF participants yet it involved directly doing
what this draft says to not do. (As I read it.) I do think
it wouldn't have been ok for e.g. an employee of Meta to be
the one presenting in that case.

Yes, that needs to be done carefully, (and was in the case
above), but we ought not preclude it being done.

Cheers,
S.



> 
> -Ekr
> 
> 
> On Sun, Oct 23, 2022 at 3:24 PM Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> 
>>
>> (BTW, with regards the dispatch question I agree with ekr.)
>>
>> On 23/10/2022 23:11, Rob Sayre wrote:
>>> I can't think of anything I would be interested in, but maybe I don't
>>> understand your position.
>>
>> I read the draft as telling us we ought not discuss whether
>> or not some proposed protocol design re-enforces the mobile
>> OS duopoly.
>>
>> S.
>>
>> --
>> Gendispatch mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch
>>
>