[hrpc] Continuing discussion and questions on Corinne's thesis - A Case Study of Coding Rights
Niels ten Oever <niels@article19.org> Fri, 04 December 2015 17:47 UTC
Return-Path: <niels@article19.org>
X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1F7F1A9032 for <hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Dec 2015 09:47:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.424
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.424 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HOST_EQ_NL=1.545, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=no
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 HRympLU1w8m0 for <hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Dec 2015 09:47:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.article19.io (vps784.greenhost.nl [213.108.108.114]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBDE61A9035 for <hrpc@irtf.org>; Fri, 4 Dec 2015 09:47:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.article19.io (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.article19.io (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9BD03124035 for <hrpc@irtf.org>; Fri, 4 Dec 2015 17:47:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.article19.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8931F124032 for <hrpc@irtf.org>; Fri, 4 Dec 2015 17:47:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail.article19.io ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.article19.io [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id Wbxtikn5KkXZ for <hrpc@irtf.org>; Fri, 4 Dec 2015 17:47:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.1.78] (sd5112335.adsl.online.nl [213.17.35.53]) by mail.article19.io (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4BAB1124031 for <hrpc@irtf.org>; Fri, 4 Dec 2015 17:47:14 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <5661D1A1.9000908@article19.org>
Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2015 18:47:13 +0100
From: Niels ten Oever <niels@article19.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "hrpc@irtf.org" <hrpc@irtf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hrpc/2YSLUtcDwehUb3YUrichHNarMT0>
Subject: [hrpc] Continuing discussion and questions on Corinne's thesis - A Case Study of Coding Rights
X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "niels@article19.org" <hrpc.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/hrpc>, <mailto:hrpc-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/hrpc/>
List-Post: <mailto:hrpc@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hrpc-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc>, <mailto:hrpc-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2015 17:47:20 -0000
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Hi all, We had to cut off the questions and discussion on Corinne's thesis - A Case Study of Coding Rights [0] in Yokohama. I wanted to create one more opportunity to discuss the thesis. Mostly because I think the thesis is a great piece of work and very constructive overview of different issues we're working on and because it could also lead us forward. Also because I still have a few questions left. Of course other peoples questions and comments are also very much encouraged. 1. You define 'openness' as 'the absence of centralised points of control' (p17). Do you think this is the mainly used definition of openness? Or are there others? If this is the main one, should we perhaps add it to the glossary? Openess is currently defined in the glossary as: The quality of the unfiltered Internet that allows for free access to other hosts Which is quite a different definition. Could you please elaborate on your rationale / choice for this definitions 2. You connect 'content agnosticism' with 'all packets are equal'. I am not sure if that is correct. I think content agnosticism means: packets are not treated differently based on their content. Would you agree? Glossary definition: Treating network traffic identically regardless of content. 3. On p.20 you seem to use distributed and decentralized interchangeably, is this intentional? 4. I like the conclusion on page 23, this quote from RFC3935 could make it even stronger: The Internet isn't value-neutral, and neither is the IETF. We want the Internet to be useful for communities that share our commitment to openness and fairness. We embrace technical concepts such as decentralized control, edge-user empowerment and sharing of resources, because those concepts resonate with the core values of the IETF community. These concepts have little to do with the technology that's possible, and much to do with the technology that we choose to create. 5. You use different ways of describing the relationship between protocol developers and human rights. Sometimes you talk about encoding human rights (which you put on the same level with 'protecting human rights') p.42, sometimes you also talk about 'instantiating human rights in protocols p.47, sometimes also 'directly instantiating the right ....' p.53 Later on you make the clear difference between 'protocol development [that is] guided by human rights principles' and 'instantiating [human rights] in protocols' p. 53. Could you give definitions of the different processes or explain the differences among them? 6. Sometimes you seem to argue there is a relative homogeneous normative conceptualization of the Internet among engineers at the IETF and sometimes you seem to argue that there is much diversity (which stimulates a tussle). Could you elaborate on this? 7. Which parts of your paper do you think could / would fit well in the methodology draft [1], glossary draft [2] and/or report draft [3]? Greatly looking forward to your response. Best, Niels [0] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/attach/hrpc/pdfbyB1Dp.pdf [1] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-varon-hrpc-methodology-02 [2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dkg-hrpc-glossary-01 [3] https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-doria-hrpc-report-00 - -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital Article 19 www.article19.org PGP fingerprint 8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJWYdGhAAoJEAi1oPJjbWjpXr0H/32trYS3LnudUKznT3fX7aDz Q5NJLGACVsQUcPjF2uBl0I67LaBZy/yu6PcMeUmPdP6Q2IX5mX+T1Lo5/SwtAb9W NQHhGd0h/zhy/+JSDU/YX5YYD22d3aXhm2hcBHSP+Bm/sPTbwZ2GRsXkwqBoSIky 1BJy8ZUSrnTNx2a0Hgel1oe6jpvCbffFeMERQJQCb4GDPBDYRyOYhlj1bVqGEra7 Z4dK1t3+cUl7FqbvBRD1e5GtY/FYGFdv1GqKdEP6T/i6Cj2qDq6OHRrFfUDHV1QQ lgVGcEcSKJQlXyb0qGaQvTndaehs7CEBui2ZKYhjSQK/3WKCi5i1R5koPLQ1LTM= =iwyg -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- [hrpc] Continuing discussion and questions on Cor… Niels ten Oever
- [hrpc] Fwd: Continuing discussion and questions o… Corinne Cath