Re: [hrpc] re how 8280 is being used for HR considerations sections

Sandra Braman <braman@tamu.edu> Tue, 04 May 2021 09:25 UTC

Return-Path: <braman@tamu.edu>
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 2ED203A2CD7 for <hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 May 2021 02:25:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.798
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.798 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTTPS_HTTP_MISMATCH=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=tamu-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.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 l63MmtPmDw4f for <hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 May 2021 02:25:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-xd2f.google.com (mail-io1-xd2f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2f]) (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 9BF643A2CD1 for <hrpc@irtf.org>; Tue, 4 May 2021 02:25:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-xd2f.google.com with SMTP id f6so1270367iow.2 for <hrpc@irtf.org>; Tue, 04 May 2021 02:25:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tamu-edu.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=GKeuAb35Li7a3rsse6T404mZ3vQClWdIdlmFW02lEJ8=; b=kjxlAOgFgusoHIdPErdnahEAuzclDrdVE8wjull3UIi7WdjrckpwdNj8Oy6NVL4SPH Lj9WPWtdTgjPFiTW0Ee/5rWlYKXIEJtZDgQHAj5r/wENxXNBoOAs72xlfxS24y6UNq4v e1oI8HmfpTgV5twAFh+h4ivbT4hANgZlU3Rnw+Tje9oB5yP8XfWDYxnA1+GKcfl2J2Pn ygOTbz3N8Vp3UqoGmZxRRH0Wzaul1ursKLoRK9KJbgI92a9aZYqLfzziyE3PGCY9cM+X wm77gBuL4E2b9EJu9vLUoUjgwaKW0gyIfq9vpM14d4IfRdDyHRRVjCgY0gOZs++aTXlN 8AFg==
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=GKeuAb35Li7a3rsse6T404mZ3vQClWdIdlmFW02lEJ8=; b=CDHdejfyfIM0TEGUvTdcKq3a5DkHfiOWw4bFe1wd2q0uf1irSUuXlGq9KbJ4ojpGLH M0850+CupzGkfWQ2CtszxC4DogLikHHvQ+vy3a5R38m3ZcBt7iNAa1XuHqfrdyEHfVnd 03RMj8VMf0jUTLPl9/cL1HNNpKQ7MJiONRa0gkYRhKO/iw8Y0Z79UVvcokAagFO9Cthw 5X/znk0tVLFSkaDEEdiGW6HUY9KtvMKbNtE+rASLxKyynwnBt9C31ogUeFI/GVKklFho xeZFsAHkCXLaz5iv8GMlbCknbhCh9rW3lcfdusV25+WXD9IhQqk9uYktP1UJYhmzuiB1 dvNg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53032w9MsA801xhvGGmX6B9k1ZCTLqyo69pMC+YQ4Kxb5XTEbekC NqEaG9rnIBckPBXkJsRJG7dqmUtcVfIEzF4jPTHUDUXNBSfYWQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzpV4xAgtl3kdb3eTqYx1F8ndB96LRzlALVNcBKx0OBRyt0hyzLgkDdU7QP1S834gdexiKB5kx8iRc+jBxQNOQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:6638:2107:: with SMTP id n7mr7296156jaj.17.1620120305318; Tue, 04 May 2021 02:25:05 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <mailman.2371.1620057586.7119.hrpc@irtf.org> <CAB2unbPMAibLYLtHVe+jJcsMa65Y5Ak4gYCGsw8QUON03BTatQ@mail.gmail.com> <f1c1ceb3-5e05-4051-b462-f68b4f8f22cb@nielstenoever.net>
In-Reply-To: <f1c1ceb3-5e05-4051-b462-f68b4f8f22cb@nielstenoever.net>
From: Sandra Braman <braman@tamu.edu>
Date: Tue, 04 May 2021 04:24:29 -0500
Message-ID: <CAB2unbOcC3+M-89d9tgBg-n64Qq68p3CHDhY4++55hi3CmtRPw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Niels ten Oever <mail@nielstenoever.net>
Cc: hrpc@irtf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004acf8505c17da723"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hrpc/ByXTX8ZvcD9LHRgZcystBn4SlGU>
Subject: Re: [hrpc] re how 8280 is being used for HR considerations sections
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: Tue, 04 May 2021 09:25:13 -0000

This is good to know, Niels -- and a very different statement from "can't
include."

However, given the other kinds of issues that have already come up with
this draft, analysis of these documents will still be useful. The presence
of particular individuals in a conversation does not necessarily mean that
all of the matters that would be pertinent to the current document will
necessarily have come up -- the conversation jumps from one topic to
another, people have pet topics (understandably), individuals come and go
in terms of attention, etc. I do fully appreciate the fact that I remain a
newbie in terms of this group's process, but systematic and comprehensive
analysis of substance is the contribution I can offer.


On Tue, May 4, 2021 at 3:39 AM Niels ten Oever <mail@nielstenoever.net>
wrote:

> Hi Sandra,
>
> Thanks a lot for your offer of examining those drafts. As a background,
> may I offer the fact that both authors of I-Ds that have been assessed,
> authors of I-Ds that used the guidelines themselves, as well as people who
> have done several assessment of other people's I-Ds using these guidelines,
> have contributed to the current document? So in that sense I think this
> document already lives up to what you describe as: 'the document should not
> be considered complete until uses people are making of the existing
> document for which the draft is trying to provide guidelines have been
> examined and insights they provide have been incorporated into the text'.
>
> Best,
>
> Niels
>
> PS You might want to have a look at several mailinglists to see how RFC
> 3552 and RFC6973 came into being if you want to make a proper comparison
> between those documents and draft-guidelines.
>
>
>
> On 4 May 2021, at 10:21, Sandra Braman <braman@tamu.edu> wrote:
>>
>> Given the process, there is no need or reason to say analysis of this
>> subject "can't be included" in the draft guidelines document currently
>> being discussed. An alternative formulation would be to say that the
>> document should not be considered complete until uses people are making of
>> the existing document for which the draft is trying to provide guidelines
>> have been examined and insights they provide have been incorporated into
>> the text. This is not only within existing scope but a basic step, for
>> would be for many the first step, for either a researcher looking at this
>> problem or for someone who is writing a guide in a technical writing sense.
>>
>> I'll do the analysis of discussions of the human rights considerations
>> section in the 7 drafts that include these sections and report back as soon
>> as I can. This should be a couple of weeks, and by then I'll have other
>> thoughts on what is the current draft of the text at that point as well
>> (with all thumbs up the option I, as so many, am hoping for). It will also
>> be interesting to see the genetic drift from RFC 3552 to RFC 6973 (which
>> opens by saying it is modeled on 3552) to RFC 8280; the 3552 I asked about
>> a few days ago is the grandparent. Thanks again to Gurshabad for pointers
>> as I am still learning my way around the document system.
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>> From: Mallory Knodel <mknodel@cdt.org>
>>> To: Sandra Braman <braman@tamu.edu>
>>> Cc: hrpc@irtf.org
>>> Bcc:
>>> Date: Mon, 3 May 2021 11:23:53 -0400
>>> Subject: Re: [hrpc] re history lessons
>>> On 5/3/21 11:15 AM, Sandra Braman wrote:
>>>
>>> > and what the reasons were for not ultimately including that section in
>>> > documents ultimately published
>>>
>>> No one has yet done this research so it can't be included or cited.
>>>
>>> We do not have any current work items on it either but would openly
>>> encourage and welcome them,
>>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> -M
>>>
>>> --
>>> Mallory Knodel
>>> CTO, Center for Democracy and Technology
>>> gpg fingerprint :: E3EB 63E0 65A3 B240 BCD9 B071 0C32 A271 BD3C C780
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>
>> hrpc mailing list
>> hrpc@irtf.org
>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc__;!!KwNVnqRv!UYrBlSSUZVT-KHEBRuO6JmhORabF2BOr-7jYlhIYUf94u-GHSmDZ6B5iLodUkQ$>
>>
>>