Re: [Gendispatch] Academia (Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF)

Brian E Carpenter <> Thu, 25 February 2021 21:21 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 087263A0B41; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 13:21:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id X_6EbqEfuEG2; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 13:21:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6173E3A0B21; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 13:21:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id l2so4694382pgb.1; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 13:21:06 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=rkXsX1VGNMXN/SgYaF5u3AEv/BbE/KUTvGAuR8C1jI4=; b=tEqkhz8CX+Kpqyhqz49fsqDArbKR+lYF0Sm/3kAqFJQXrUAQQ1v/11B+lEFxfW+Q55 O/VZF1/sdM/B6PvAkx1xtWvE/ill/bG8HxRki0Uy3hmF7X9FbOz/miz1kei+krvyyGc2 OEPgx+u5M7ZUirZt6SyduwftzMai2iaJhXBjnCINixqLSxKxrMvkDS6XUUlw28WZvJIe Ucc1+YrKidtz07etc7QMQ0zTFIEzBQwFSfit6mpsKMKNqbjSrLMjsCsOMpOazUPZWOF7 3y8wS9W0SC2NRhrArVxkbtyB8kfd8gro+8DdKgZ7aoMxKQkjoajjWu1r1fZ1uip64xNL Up2Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=rkXsX1VGNMXN/SgYaF5u3AEv/BbE/KUTvGAuR8C1jI4=; b=c9/nxWFlIrIE65EwxZW//yD8odUCLBfshQMQ0g+yCoW9IEjMCrxiup/ZzBTzFEQky7 0uuWXM5Xz1DHb52qhbJtyFaXjbQU5votG9nMbc3dLFuwR92CmL8tH100MFdu808Sz8QE m+YKcECVwtzOFHrlFLOPGyVkrgjQUvKcddkw7wMZI/2Ww0qhcaCWvZ2qy6BARVg9kMKr i+l2KMVMyfwdSMLyjp873tjvRw7BulpDSyP++D/12Gan80k6/9WsPI0UYjevCe38+D51 ThuAIyuVfWgTlmGuH1cqANK2N8G/r3RU3RtINzDq6K9WvmTvf4I74UpI1HPUnkFBkI5w lc/w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5317VZQ72v4XnA8/164O/NFuLz/Uqo3of6xfVSsPvlGSRTI1Hz8r Zz4wAMo7CNKWWtxN2O27kKOVgLeUxBQyOw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwDsFa0Jryu+dEXn5mS2h5pLgjqeL15R384WTtIlLlLY1WD+D98WfP78QQA5ZcSU5dLBCpVbA==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:5a0c:: with SMTP id o12mr4763127pgb.76.1614288065490; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 13:21:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ([]) by with ESMTPSA id g6sm7239293pfi.15.2021. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 25 Feb 2021 13:21:05 -0800 (PST)
To: Lars Eggert <>, Theresa Enghardt <>
Cc: Fernando Gont <>, GENDISPATCH List <>, Keith Moore <>, "" <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Brian E Carpenter <>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 10:21:00 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Academia (Re: 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 21:21:08 -0000

On 26-Feb-21 06:29, Lars Eggert wrote:
> Hi,
> On 2021-2-25, at 18:16, Theresa Enghardt <> wrote:
>> That is true. With ANRW, you at least get to present a short paper or poster at a workshop, so that's a step in the right direction.
> that was actually the main motivation for collocating ANRW always with the IETF - typically, academics can justify conference and workshop travel much more easily than standards travel.
>> Good point about publications. RFCs are publications, too, so there is definitely some ROI in (co-)authoring an RFC as an academic. However, usually the entire process takes much longer than writing academic papers. And I'm not sure how academia at large values RFCs relative to papers, but at least in the part that I know, I would say they're valued.
> One thing we did to increase the value of RFCs to academics was to assign them DOIs, which at least for universities in some geos is a prerequisite to even recognizing RFCs as academic output.

Nevertheless, it is in general hard to get RFCs recognised as valuable for tenure and promotion purposes, compared to more traditional publication streams such as highly-rated journals. That's one reason we did but I'm not sure it has had much impact.