IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hrpc] Possible options for a HRPC research publication

Mallory Knodel <mknodel@cdt.org> Fri, 10 April 2020 13:46 UTC

Return-Path: <mknodel@cdt.org>
X-Original-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8CA23A0A7E for <hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 06:46:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cdt.org
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 VSzbNyhuF4nG for <hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 06:46:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm1-x332.google.com (mail-wm1-x332.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::332]) (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 042643A003D for <hrpc@irtf.org>; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 06:45:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm1-x332.google.com with SMTP id x25so2566673wmc.0 for <hrpc@irtf.org>; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 06:45:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cdt.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=zQAY1zGlDSo2UfXntUUdH0cljL05MIobge2GiA8HK38=; b=fbCqRhV8Ak3F6ufLZ8t8FBitjyF11FSY4+/cNpoQNDwhzbV3DH99AbqJwWpidmxC/L bv9JJgztKLu8YLlphvV7ryd/5AGwX5JwGQFrVi8hkP7qshyAn2/pKzlWy6sjg0hvJ9XY wKF5W87UnMsyvqA522CBsPrlfVIoPD7zmd0eM=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=zQAY1zGlDSo2UfXntUUdH0cljL05MIobge2GiA8HK38=; b=LV5e9VamC2VI4Qo34Orkqs9mnDYlrnSyucH4D24gQbXUK+QKt2Fd2o/vS4cS13W+l/ Z0Bz5F0Ex9MdH7lWhH/eppJj9YzxsQd/RpiBuGTzVTP4BCoND0HScN62AjYHesqCJK7t eNjC8AtClAEeXklBJ7AlOb8SzioYq35PqmQlz4meqPPk93+rg/zYWaZ9oNTbhGj4ZFGU HTmardUbiwD7Tc+7rnGJ6P4P0GlO0mw6lqindWhjSFPViUDAHLxG4brpyaCV7HwNhpUn nCA4wHccv0aQu3OH3f+2c42zvWVYzDyn7t434sOkLn+2Fge9oihls1iBg0TvPhMf9SXW 1/hQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuYyaY74fgehaIpp11qcIWNIiPQ0uQasuSWKWDjlmYP8wJq6OGPm NhB+n4Fdr0o1jTjmqqoHVSutohv2TTbNNQdsFZIA4A==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypKjpg823U8v6/1JhMqpnPP+dpATJblHwLfdv6F6k1KoWztBt5VWwXBNR1YvuqQvD+eFfubi5TPGMM3gZcPn0+E=
X-Received: by 2002:a1c:3b0a:: with SMTP id i10mr5114816wma.26.1586526352217; Fri, 10 Apr 2020 06:45:52 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <de0ba70d-f2e8-93cb-d2a9-ee6b73b67f18@doria.org> <27c5e9d9-7c8a-985e-2fb1-99ccb50af9a7@cs.tcd.ie> <PR1PR07MB4891B933546D7D221A808694F3C00@PR1PR07MB4891.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <68b733e9-4053-60d9-b65d-f8dac2712f00@nielstenoever.net> <alpine.LRH.2.21.2004091526060.21348@bofh.nohats.ca> <CAN1qJvA5n=U5ENj7E+Y+yuM+F=EynMq1swCtcKVYHjx9NPtyzA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAN1qJvA5n=U5ENj7E+Y+yuM+F=EynMq1swCtcKVYHjx9NPtyzA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mallory Knodel <mknodel@cdt.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2020 09:45:40 -0400
Message-ID: <CAGVFjM+Asv_aq1nNsxTeSt8MhLBnN6ZW3EtbNDk1iAEwmxEeOQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com>
Cc: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>, hrpc@irtf.org, Niels ten Oever <mail@nielstenoever.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a6a80705a2eff35d"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hrpc/3gmF_FMAtbKLVGuMcrl9KXric6A>
Subject: Re: [hrpc] Possible options for a HRPC research publication
X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: hrpc discussion list <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, 10 Apr 2020 13:46:03 -0000

Hi Farzaneh,

By "the document" I assume you mean draft-political, to which you yourself
wrote and presented a differing view in response. Is your document still
something you think this group should attend to and work on? Was it revised
after the latest rounds of feedback in Prague and on the list? Or perhaps
it's been published elsewhere (please share link)? I'd suggest you start a
separate thread on this.

"without the rush to creating an RFC out of every opinion and manifesto."

Anyone actively participating in this group would know there has been no
rushing to anything on behalf of this research group; nor is this at all a
fair characterisation of our RG's current work items.

-Mallory

On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 4:09 PM farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Sure but not every enthusiastic academic piece qualifies as an RFC. Half
> baked conceptual ideas that need years of development and their
> implementation is doubtful too and there is no consensus around them should
> not just be pushed through unless there are fundamental and clear
> substantive changes in the document. The evolution of concepts must be
> clear with strong empirical analysis. Or it has to be narrower without
> grand theoretical and philosophical claims.  Otherwise publishing a piece
> as RFC is merely giving lip service to human rights. I don't know how this
> process is going to play out but maybe academics can layout their  concepts
> and ideas in the non-RFC track and  RG can consider what needs to be
> transferred to the RFC track. I think academics are in need of good
> feedback to build on what they have, and the non-RFC track should include
> ways to receive feedback from the IETF community so that they can improve
> their pieces and be published without the rush to creating an RFC out of
> every opinion and manifesto.
>
> Farzaneh
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 9, 2020 at 3:36 PM Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 8 Apr 2020, Niels ten Oever wrote:
>>
>> > The publication in the RFC-series and the connected exposure to, and
>> interaction with, the technical community in the IRTF and IETF is for me
>> the main reason to work and publish here.
>>
>> I agree with Niels. Publishing an RFC is needed so that the IETF
>> community takes human rights considerations more seriously.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> hrpc mailing list
>> hrpc@irtf.org
>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
>>
> _______________________________________________
> hrpc mailing list
> hrpc@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
>


-- 
Mallory Knodel
CTO, Center for Democracy and Technology
gpg fingerprint :: E3EB 63E0 65A3 B240 BCD9 B071 0C32 A271 BD3C C780

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email