IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Iasa20] outside the US [was Answers]

Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> Sat, 17 March 2018 08:13 UTC

Return-Path: <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
X-Original-To: iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5252127241 for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Mar 2018 01:13:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, 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=yitter.info header.b=MiepVfyX; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=yitter.info header.b=kPgEyVPa
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 Ggp83pweijhL for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Mar 2018 01:13:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx4.yitter.info (mx4.yitter.info [159.203.56.111]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 558C11200F1 for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Sat, 17 Mar 2018 01:13:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx4.yitter.info (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E52ABE780 for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Sat, 17 Mar 2018 08:13:08 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1521274388; bh=3flMs3Nnor2A2IomvO1Zq2uxpv5AHhT1RoBsb+IsKJU=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=MiepVfyXPdTS5SHhz/H+QPTJ93LXkGkkIXnwDcGo3EQR2tL7ffZoLgwsZNrUdVLd5 HbXV4vBPlsX7Nno6/9NEG8GXWlMQFV/nljp0QcNl2dTtgNW9xqfVcT++brsxwt8qiL HU3r7MphlGurqU9hRmARL5wmwS8xJPTeXSVnxwa0=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at crankycanuck.ca
Received: from mx4.yitter.info ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx4.yitter.info [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wcoR2L-CK_hx for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Sat, 17 Mar 2018 08:13:07 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2018 04:13:03 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yitter.info; s=default; t=1521274387; bh=3flMs3Nnor2A2IomvO1Zq2uxpv5AHhT1RoBsb+IsKJU=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=kPgEyVPacrVV19YE/eNj9SFLi5jK1+SsYp9M3jA41ClyJ6yx5m8K0nWz2M43mxBbV k64nGrD0CRdMIGxuVExITVQJC3F+bGRARzsDgHGLi0WuyBA/sKW5//0C+nFGl8Zt7U sl+f+DLzLX0soBzPIkOjnG+CsPu4G624XI4B7QGw=
From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com>
To: iasa20@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20180317081303.wnlkojbpt7keacnz@mx4.yitter.info>
References: <20180316211438.mqjf74376cfkhdht@mx4.yitter.info> <5cc63d89-dbe9-ebcc-b390-0e62a4f00157@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5cc63d89-dbe9-ebcc-b390-0e62a4f00157@gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iasa20/Rzr50HDrnqRBYsCZirwhjoxtfbc>
Subject: Re: [Iasa20] outside the US [was Answers]
X-BeenThere: iasa20@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions relating to reorganising the IETF administrative structures in the so called “IASA 2.0” project. <iasa20.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/iasa20>, <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/iasa20/>
List-Post: <mailto:iasa20@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20>, <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 17 Mar 2018 08:13:41 -0000

On Sat, Mar 17, 2018 at 03:15:40PM +1300, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

> So the post-IASA2.0 version of RFC 2031 needs to preserve the
> option of ISOC speaking for us when necessary.

I'd probably describe this differently but mean effectively the same
thing; but I thought we were talking about (basically internal)
adminstrative relationships and money flows, not principled technical
stances.  Is there something that gives you to believe we were talking
about affecting the interface between the IETF and the rest of the
world?

Best regards,

A

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@anvilwalrusden.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email