IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com> Thu, 09 April 2020 20:09 UTC

Return-Path: <farzaneh.badii@gmail.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 21B913A0D73 for <hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 13:09:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, 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 (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 l6vSgAtlx1q5 for <hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 13:09:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt1-x831.google.com (mail-qt1-x831.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::831]) (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 E6BE13A0D6F for <hrpc@irtf.org>; Thu, 9 Apr 2020 13:09:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt1-x831.google.com with SMTP id 13so1052311qtt.5 for <hrpc@irtf.org>; Thu, 09 Apr 2020 13:09:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=EWuNo+yUZdWrgukgBdFNGmCXeF7NRPJH5sOt0v779mM=; b=TcGMJlqPKxMO8klgnFHHibpqAPdzynnCQqiNsWMGZtQ7xKfoGQTUUx0eDIyCSRezq7 QqZUe1Y4GVCFmw6ksRREAUlPyJjvXxVs1cBXrvRzmrSPZeU5UCa6GPciZ/BFnRUPL3vT /RNbw/c0SGjnq993UvNs9Pf1gdIAHijKQSt9g96TcyQZ/PTg+En6VO5fSY+H7gokH0uP B7hJUnZ7qxjFNWfFEYZqoseo/m0yGbbOzQW/zHM8+j3hDnqMx75P91br3+d6ZEtpfdKh hlWNkRUWX671UcUIgvMTbZD0TJxNEBqIC3mF0/viWuuq+kBrM4vsL7EGyYY7WWKMmlSl iCUg==
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=EWuNo+yUZdWrgukgBdFNGmCXeF7NRPJH5sOt0v779mM=; b=KRHT7rdzHToS09/cPvnt0BX/Kge7oLglNdirKw3lCxb0D4mfviRrVYrNTDORvMzuA9 8drnTxE9BA+74FuZI74U1wbVbr9Auatkr6dEUB4v/aS3qqwBX3O5Tr9V4T8bCYVKLgCI STa3OdkBEgeDZOA2R5lYZEwv/QH0MAoM1dTUbTHzefYPLUZb2WcRKRRwXuooH0HDVeOL ram1Du92zMW2HZLw3iDybNum7JnrCbID+lMuIqi6gFxY4OMAoC4vvt0p0ejROsgZ5BBL wwruuj3DS6KH02ekhm4ATC3mzmeEvH23UU/iO91Ocv0NW6BP09mzHtola0/4bBD9I+8u lhhg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuaNxhvqU9AZo0arUzF8wKbkoPQhftb7viEyVm9fBqVkIDH/yPjq hH6aFEbhRCWXuBXpwi/8AmjWwpEa3c/q/CcNU9Q=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJm+yen+9Ov3IY1qClYqAU9Tw0vXdy57qruL+v9xOdVS7Au9OmDItKUvYu4cJX1Me3jdMLYfKJfitLwMf2PuBY=
X-Received: by 2002:ac8:4cd1:: with SMTP id l17mr1241557qtv.20.1586462980455; Thu, 09 Apr 2020 13:09:40 -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>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LRH.2.21.2004091526060.21348@bofh.nohats.ca>
From: farzaneh badii <farzaneh.badii@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2020 16:09:13 -0400
Message-ID: <CAN1qJvA5n=U5ENj7E+Y+yuM+F=EynMq1swCtcKVYHjx9NPtyzA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
Cc: Niels ten Oever <mail@nielstenoever.net>, hrpc@irtf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000066469105a2e1326a"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hrpc/Vum57LWmarkeBAgYFQlHwUu477U>
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: Thu, 09 Apr 2020 20:09:47 -0000

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
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email