Re: [Gendispatch] I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-01.txt

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 23 November 2021 01:30 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0346D3A0C17 for <gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 17:30:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.951
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.951 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.852, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 ToA2arLb_nvX for <gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 17:30:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pl1-x636.google.com (mail-pl1-x636.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::636]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1D2C3A0C12 for <gendispatch@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 17:30:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pl1-x636.google.com with SMTP id y8so15667389plg.1 for <gendispatch@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 17:30:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZM+HLGD8A0aORnhNsOKnRl2Jx2cbpUpobNDEKRFiCZc=; b=MFM2LjrHRSN/fLPUFFp5CDZyV1VntyMgTkmeE+BfNtlCzPg0THUL3diRqjlIMVaQqJ 17DQAUL1+/o6gYFLfjKR153cTYEW6DzMJiwog9RwpsJnwC/4iKY0jfhNYspYiDnvFoW2 qwY4ptghSAAzqQOFzN8+ApAu+Yc+HUM0mlg1j92LA+nFKDdQgF+pgQiKvl1hnsuslzEi q18zw4JHC+f6Td3T20EJM84Zwo23i8d9UfsyDitVcP/BmX2rLS/fxFmm/0xI2+dGmkQO MVz5InzWRxkOOAJahhhfnW3oEywtzBvNx1KbXKVnjYWZge+oesIpf7YukhyLvggvItqb cxdQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZM+HLGD8A0aORnhNsOKnRl2Jx2cbpUpobNDEKRFiCZc=; b=3YADK+yhe4CdWS3b7VW4onNT72t6EJfSA/wRIdeyfBetoO/QjDDLmOuBvJUZGU24rc L+rRqe6BdEu8Y+flyOXQzoBbg62dnEClFUsSPg4koB3lLdIFn5bHXPfAKMIUnhc1KRDt QnbxXjq1e7NYOA/xeFNWYxWY/p9QEsJ71nRXW8r06YWatIFGZE5y5/D1+nIrZX1d0Hzp z+I2Ft+ySsD9rx9NbHLZ1M3WKOvU+PzVScoEkKmfTXjWXNahclWrle+B12vbjhaEayI2 DklakjmL0uE2mvLZxCFHTGBVMRRz4947l9edNw9TQtnnQ77Q6G8agKIdhk9YnTw/v0/f P0NQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533AIM6WS97cymSVnRHcI2bxA0lwT9uwYQ7D7ccndtZDOzqq1voV 8xjUIZQUXI9ubAyU9DF1Zg3L21zhPKZb/g==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxGYz/W6UllWohTD9nMLe2awlfOKrKrplWtJE7kdKh6MsW3Tiz9It2JzspFYko6UqTllq1x5Q==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:cf85:: with SMTP id i5mr38804018pju.101.1637631018210; Mon, 22 Nov 2021 17:30:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e003:102d:e801:80b2:5c79:2266:e431? ([2406:e003:102d:e801:80b2:5c79:2266:e431]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e11sm8597776pjl.20.2021.11.22.17.30.16 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 22 Nov 2021 17:30:17 -0800 (PST)
To: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, gendispatch@ietf.org
References: <163595251682.11706.5053299985084837548@ietfa.amsl.com> <8854c3cc-694b-1a7f-ebc8-47bed9bb4e0f@joelhalpern.com> <E1D78C01-243A-49A5-83F7-C4D7198536CF@biddle.law> <f2af7a04-e8c9-f2dc-1c47-b246d2a97108@cs.tcd.ie> <af2df313-5408-7bcc-132c-2a2e7700b885@joelhalpern.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f3a08ea6-aa9d-2166-f1dd-b50184461636@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2021 14:30:14 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <af2df313-5408-7bcc-132c-2a2e7700b885@joelhalpern.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/gendispatch/km3tr3LPCXsYotQN1bo1t1Rahws>
Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-01.txt
X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: General Area Dispatch <gendispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gendispatch>, <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gendispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:gendispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch>, <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2021 01:30:23 -0000

On 23-Nov-21 05:44, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
> While there are some participants for whom competition law is not an
> issue, there are many participants for whom it is an issue.


I have always felt it was relevant to me, whether or not I worked for
a large IT company. How can it *not* be relevant to anyone who is
actively participating in discussions with multiple companies? Suppose
somebody from company A asks you to tell somebody from company B
about A's pricing policy? Surely, doing that would be illegal.
  
> The intended approach is a short statements that highlights a very few
> aspects of competition law that should be kept in mind by anyone to whom
> they apply.


Which is (I think) everybody, because of the above thought experiment.

>   From where I sit, it is important to have the note well pointer as it
> is very difficult to claim we as a community have made an effort to
> inform people about the issue if we bury the results in an informational
> RFC no one ever hears about.


I agree. The reason I think this should not be a BCP is because it is
in no way a change to the IETF's rules. But there is a sound argument
that a warning should be given.

    Brian
  
> We (the co-authors) are still trying to work out the wording for the
> much shorter approach.
> 
> Yours,
> Joel
> 
> On 11/22/2021 11:37 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm not that convinced we need to do anything but no
>> harm having the discussion, so seems reasonable for
>> you and/or Joel to make a modified proposal.
>>
>> On 22/11/2021 15:28, Brad Biddle wrote:
>>> I recommend that that we develop an explicit statement that addresses
>>> antitrust compliance, and that we reference that statement in the Note
>>> Well text that is routinely shown to participants.
>>
>> If you do do the above, please take into account that
>> competition law is not at all a direct issue for a lot
>> of IETF participants and we don't want to ever give the
>> impression that those for whom competition law etc is
>> a direct issue are more important participants. (For me
>> that's a reason to not put that in the Note Well text
>> which is already getting way too cumbersome.)
>>
>> Cheers,
>> S.
>