Re: [hrpc] HRPC recharter

Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> Fri, 06 January 2023 07:16 UTC

Return-Path: <abdussalambaryun@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 6B605C151555 for <hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Jan 2023 23:16:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.095
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.095 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=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 ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JJlrqAAKK9G0 for <hrpc@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Jan 2023 23:16:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lj1-x234.google.com (mail-lj1-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::234]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9950BC151523 for <hrpc@irtf.org>; Thu, 5 Jan 2023 23:16:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lj1-x234.google.com with SMTP id bx6so685210ljb.3 for <hrpc@irtf.org>; Thu, 05 Jan 2023 23:16:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=utrXi6ppqXkdpAywNzT55PgZuI9/TsdUpPWj7NBc5Uo=; b=R/4qA4joBrLcclzKmuJdJWXOSu21LcJEtgA99JEJ3VhStlL5yhoeCfin6her1TCAjV /0uT3mFo65IfvQSuDX7n1sfyiunTrbPsysNmTLon72l+zvAjUqfE+6WW45V3BtGqUTLB XTPi5mpR6PLBsZYBdCu98etV1nRLNXfy5X+qmWOawXdEogwpF/0bQHUPBoLgVPy7+Jf4 NOGArXbKkLjwde70DQd7+NP+UIMwlN6aX3uYRzn+A7MroLP8FD7HUsOxsJ+TFMYkVPkR 825y5ej3GcUmwA9AeWd+vfYDfZBMBOUP1izYl3OntbEtAnCHcpjgS+tKWnoK1oaUoQoM ceOQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=utrXi6ppqXkdpAywNzT55PgZuI9/TsdUpPWj7NBc5Uo=; b=gioP+8BJGNBtCTMxtNW9y+Fx0NWMz25BfaLPvgBU4PV3a56mL0vxxBfXkIyh2wjMxB SOtdzNJMGYip22awgtmUX6UEk8+pO5XA16DKDpwiSFgNNGXulznsvfvpBwAYK9BNDV96 POHaCXvMx2N1aHAvfNQnar5m8N+6k0U0MKkSSPv5/9HAsLlNcZrdsA0tET1BtfWeUq08 6daSDdQfRaXkXBn3sz7X4I39pzCNVRJhvgrg+s7KbcJYNj+6QUoOmRcmeeb/5WZdYjVg lHkPx8jWMeOGfPEMrbHGanPg1R+B2Uj93tj+JGeVB58bbqrUiZj03EOAeZ5K38Bc4QTF GH4A==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2kpeW2DEB0dZoZT8IVbtqtLkjm5pzQLq/YFJurXaFEyl5mOaylGH wi68/4qptHJ2Ng2ECluVYItZ81RrUTM0CjCrOD1I3rkX
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXvMH4IO7hK5klnuGUJdmFoSxzneHAit8WzWtSTiwiRpnsw0s/edm4uSj5NNxitKbaCD9PU5H1udKwZI7y8Hg0k=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:984d:0:b0:27f:cdec:38b1 with SMTP id e13-20020a2e984d000000b0027fcdec38b1mr2825319ljj.299.1672989378065; Thu, 05 Jan 2023 23:16:18 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <6ddd480d-76ed-a05e-066d-d740fee61441@cdt.org> <CABcZeBO-kN+KmNcGuiAxv5ZidvuZW5A5yjB2mP_ZJCiF1qNLyg@mail.gmail.com> <f727a6c8-7f1e-0db8-46d0-36248b921b79@cdt.org> <CABcZeBPuGUXcAo6z+uSCn=99ct7ALxOP8aQHYX+ncViLitMciw@mail.gmail.com> <ff338456-b2b5-0eec-f18f-be81ef1afe99@cdt.org> <CABcZeBO_9tjxDTurFr-uaN6OAPR1=Qo7aJNNHMprLPBUyrsAEg@mail.gmail.com> <68dab8e6-b17c-4ceb-5267-d4edb62f3eea@cdt.org> <20230106020951.wrv6cgr6eci4lqoo@crankycanuck.ca>
In-Reply-To: <20230106020951.wrv6cgr6eci4lqoo@crankycanuck.ca>
From: Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Jan 2023 09:16:58 +0200
Message-ID: <CADnDZ8-SKerdwb9HSj9=AAvOryPwqViR_-+9qs05YmwxwCw1Gg@mail.gmail.com>
To: hrpc@irtf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000097b9cf05f1933144"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/hrpc/lsTZLGZJcoPD8UPWXER8vpR8opg>
Subject: Re: [hrpc] HRPC recharter
X-BeenThere: hrpc@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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, 06 Jan 2023 07:16:24 -0000

On Fri, Jan 6, 2023 at 4:10 AM Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
wrote:

> Dear colleagues,
>
> Still employed, still just my opinion.
>
> On Thu, Jan 05, 2023 at 11:01:07AM -0500, Mallory Knodel wrote:
>
> >Understood that this is your view. On the other hand, the feedback we
> >are consistently getting in our actual meetings and through our most
> >recent IAB review is that in fact HRPC is contributing and doing well
> >and we don't need to be overwrought in our attempts to do more work.
>
> My reading of the minutes of the IAB meeting from 2022-11-08 is doubtless
> more poorly informed than yours would be, since I wasn't in the meeting.
> Nevertheless, when I read them what I do not see is a lot of encouragement
> of scope changing.  What I read, on the contrary, is some hesitation about
> the wisdom of expanding the scope in this way. The person on the IAB who
> was arguing for that explicit scope expansion is also a chair of this RG
> (i.e. you.  BTW, the minutes aren't linked at
> https://www.iab.org/wiki/index.php/RG_Reviews but are in the main IAB
> minutes pages).
>
> >This is why I want to make very incisive changes to the charter that
> >very slightly expand the work into policy
>
> But this is the concern I was trying to raise in my prior note to the
> list: I don't think the text you have proposed is incisive change or very
> slight expansion.  Instead, if I read it correctly, it appears to turn the
> RG into a (not to say "yet one more") venue where people come together to
> talk "policy" without much in the way of bounds on what is in or out of
> scope or even what kind of policy is involved.  I don't wish to be
> provocative, but I am sceptical that the IRTF needs to reproduce the
> Internet Governance Forum.


I agree totally, and I think separating policy from protocol is best, if a
group wants research in *policy* then open another RG with new charter for
that, and in future we can know how to recharter after we do our tasks but
not now.

Regards
AB