Re: [hrpc] re history lessons

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Mon, 03 May 2021 15:19 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
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 7A3D23A1813 for <hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 May 2021 08:19:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.797
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.797 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, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, 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=fugue-com.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 vSNYkt7M8fNd for <hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 May 2021 08:19:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt1-x835.google.com (mail-qt1-x835.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::835]) (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 DAB7D3A1811 for <hrpc@irtf.org>; Mon, 3 May 2021 08:19:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt1-x835.google.com with SMTP id j11so682556qtn.12 for <hrpc@irtf.org>; Mon, 03 May 2021 08:19:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=Rb4xB/pYAc/ucsW+WNiurYIrkVazBTaMIFPf5ITym1g=; b=fYlc7hCA8sNT6nU2eZzgA+jf5WjgO1WO1jNVbxJJxDiPF5NXEJMzLFLJ7hc/h54590 90VGBnA+Z4dYbMnIH1j0nVjTEhZdQ/w5Fn2+LohDB30gAel89We8D/p7VLOID0UsKYcQ Unviy/3668Hn6Zv65q+Ywz1ehmybzShBG/2sI9og/S/IS0CyPiXjiKkGMj/gECmlSwnH OWlY5OgJqIaPa2CryWxcfgnnxgT4APyRHQUwTJjTh91wNwM0xkmREDEkebyiLPcpRXAF W2DE1LWx2viGMmgOuo1atQE2SPxMAWTydDzPMK3k6TxaocEmpL/xlrAE0yBFEXgLUrGx urYA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=Rb4xB/pYAc/ucsW+WNiurYIrkVazBTaMIFPf5ITym1g=; b=B0nzXRXNua+3Y4mEOczo3pENKcZcFWDsoXBzE59f1RF/TuN53jMnI+uhyjCkzDhjXT tMx6i5ToWNj87Dr6ngVAbs9QmvxINTSKQjuhvNOtOkql3WYlf441ULC+WlJ5o5QjcjQz 4Hw5yrhnoFaa/pdBjBtVn4uYvY/hTnz4ekpU6QjjjBVB6O+hQjbqG7WiXYq1nLq8gr58 Z20TRuVlhLsDRi1o2PMbPtaCE2lrC/YcCFjvbZfGXTe/ld7OttEdkVVnrFOhqZL4WYrN KymwZqU7ugOk+mriw4OMQxEJwnP+FFqNS4sqtiCI9Tgsja4jnjqAHhTNN57G8alDwXUo 8mRQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532I7IqAk3sCdfCye75+ET/dFZCufOk4EMylOFbrb6q6eD031tj2 s5rmNvKY19mqgPSBI92+Lc3soTxdkSvakQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw8PqZlfhzkh7mvm277lraZMlF0RQ8IqovAVhBQliI+RjBtu73gk8JLKZszKOfReFHmFENBvA==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1002:: with SMTP id d2mr17065098qte.245.1620055171842; Mon, 03 May 2021 08:19:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (c-24-91-177-160.hsd1.nh.comcast.net. [24.91.177.160]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g4sm45055qtg.86.2021.05.03.08.19.31 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 03 May 2021 08:19:31 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-D57254D2-7944-4E9A-AAD2-30B56585CFF2"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Mon, 03 May 2021 11:19:29 -0400
Message-Id: <A81BD7F6-22A1-4F27-AA1F-E6BAEFE375DE@fugue.com>
References: <CAB2unbOv2nUym_fjB9f1jtZUP+4dM9e1JHQ3-PutG-UN9UTcRw@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Mallory Knodel <mknodel@cdt.org>, hrpc@irtf.org
In-Reply-To: <CAB2unbOv2nUym_fjB9f1jtZUP+4dM9e1JHQ3-PutG-UN9UTcRw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sandra Braman <braman@tamu.edu>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18E199)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hrpc/LxXVYbb_3uZUtPnAWyST2z9iIw4>
Subject: Re: [hrpc] re history lessons
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: Mon, 03 May 2021 15:19:39 -0000

Which rfc is on the right to bear arms?

> On May 3, 2021, at 11:16, Sandra Braman <braman@tamu.edu> wrote:
> 
> 
> Appreciate this, Mallory.  Our interpretations of the effects of particular activities may reasonably differ, but you are also assigning meaning to my comment that was not there. I did not say I was discounting the code 451 effort, although you and I may disagree regarding what the nature of its consequences are.
> 
> I have so far looked only at RFCs for mention of 8280; there is just the one. Would appreciate it if others could point me to Internet drafts that do. Was fascinated to see that the only RFC mentioning 8280 does so by focusing on the right to bear arms.
> 
> I agree with you that it would be a great research project for someone to analyze discussions of drafts that do mention human rights considerations, and what the reasons were for not ultimately including that section in documents ultimately published. Actually, that could be useful as input into future HRPC efforts.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Mon, May 3, 2021 at 9:53 AM Mallory Knodel <mknodel@cdt.org> wrote:
>> Hi Sandra,
>> 
>> It would be incorrect to minimise the impact of RFC 8280 and HRPC this way, Sandra.
>> 
>> The fact that 451 isn't as technically implementable as authors envisioned is orthogonal to its human rights considerations. It shouldn't be discounted.
>> 
>> I believe there are more RFCs and I-D that directly cite a human rights consideration, but others might chime in on which specifically.
>> 
>> It also won't include the ways in which people engage in draft reviews with human rights considerations influenced by RFC 8280. Harder to measure, but still worth doing. 
>> 
>> -Mallory
>> 
>> On 5/3/21 10:43 AM, Sandra Braman wrote:
>>> Point taken, Niels, re the archive -- have read most of it but will ensure it is all read and reviewed for its attention to this particular question; will return to the list if questions remain.
>>> 
>>> Another, if I may -- It turns out, according to Mallory and others, code 451 has not actually been useful. What do members of this group make out of the fact that only one RFC since publication of 8280 has addressed human rights considerations, and that was the right to bear arms?  Is it expected that publication of the guidelines document currently in progress will make a difference?  Any advice regarding where I can turn for explanations of this?
>>> 
>>> Thanks again --
>>> 
>>> Sandra
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
> _______________________________________________
> hrpc mailing list
> hrpc@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc