Re: [Ideas] Alissa Cooper's Block on charter-ietf-ideas-00-06: (with BLOCK)

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Wed, 11 October 2017 19:31 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.com>
X-Original-To: ideas@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ideas@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 941E81321DC for <ideas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 12:31:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=rtfm-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 qA6yrui7ARWK for <ideas@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 12:31:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qt0-x230.google.com (mail-qt0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::230]) (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 723FA126B6D for <ideas@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 12:31:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x230.google.com with SMTP id k31so8561009qta.6 for <ideas@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 12:31:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=gRxaxAjoGTGcFkzt8uxgrYUWyj4hcRht4NMJ5wNqUjk=; b=ON4NM+KH8auHdBv4b6niMNraRW6sfiD/EFQrP4K/o0//Vi68HaTVS4cTvSmO/LUKIY JFc1gHH1oV1Gon0DRtHRn8UYZWnXxcqxasQrQM3qTuw44jw6LMYTaoFiT2cq5Kt7qlDP b5WF3iiHkOlKEwOHPPo+TWt7VRjOffSxTx7yea4FCtUvdUeVjnoDPJtSkMsjdslldXZ5 Ile6vjy9oHcdM1f3Pqbuzj46VK1uE+p3VL0ImbFDmQ3p9TZzCC7uIjt+4g/rs2kjbj2j nVl/vTlm4TDxOG7ilXbtlOLhtgPs8AT9F18A/ByF/VNas6agRNuqgRUbqt6eIeZ34gLj 7Ryg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=gRxaxAjoGTGcFkzt8uxgrYUWyj4hcRht4NMJ5wNqUjk=; b=SA7LzKiw04S5NoZk0PODAF4hB9ObGtJY7pzhG+ej4DV8j7M+LgiZgDTXxNJEUw28Ko okaoBixch/V8NYstKyz0SVaBWHWylS/kTnvqS0WGHBFJxmVZHyhEB3fwCWGGv+LWbO/+ pFxzwU7Ko4Gu+T5WgW4Oqy8iX4nBvCDLHtpZVV56m4Dpmf9o4TLrAQ5alFp1HNz0FFkS NnAIbNXdDBYeD7fkvGOu5l6Ny7CticDIiLf2n2RCRsUfba251teuwCRv2GxF2uown0uZ xOMH32otJbPMdTIX0ydF7XN2Y3lZZk2sc5azd/wWXvMAkxeOEbzlFs8s6hwhGvzzk3NS AjnA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMCzsaWsjOKr4YLSPPO0PbPKXAe+R8bii8F2fp11e5q2sLK/beeJUkUw sd2gud/TTNe/4wHUxYZ//2OlR+ehk0m7qhEdL7iOGA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QDEsvG7B28g6YTWuswQolkLQ65y6R2fcevpEvnY0Y65aHUsR1mTi3KMLKdCcY4EeiqmwmpQTDj9YfuQv8ftxWc=
X-Received: by 10.129.167.66 with SMTP id e63mr423760ywh.294.1507750261634; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 12:31:01 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.129.75.194 with HTTP; Wed, 11 Oct 2017 12:30:21 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAG-CQxpbxMiT=NDNwytVsxF3XqLEH3j4FS11Gkk-=O9EH104Bw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <150773363527.24819.15137383317907133805.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <47ABE650-B83D-4400-B27C-C0E5F1C8BA13@gmail.com> <CABcZeBMG+OyYv1Kaeb1BeuUX_Tc3yz8TYObtv7JTVteSuY35Gg@mail.gmail.com> <CAG-CQxpbxMiT=NDNwytVsxF3XqLEH3j4FS11Gkk-=O9EH104Bw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 12:30:21 -0700
Message-ID: <CABcZeBMLwwqMA6t9skkQezF2s6Z3bZ5zu+=pTvrCJjww6chwtQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Padma Pillay-Esnault <padma.ietf@gmail.com>
Cc: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>, ideas@ietf.org, ideas-chairs@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c079026c1454c055b4a7655"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ideas/aPaAm2FF9WA6y7wZMaDRLQ0Iv_M>
Subject: Re: [Ideas] Alissa Cooper's Block on charter-ietf-ideas-00-06: (with BLOCK)
X-BeenThere: ideas@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussions relating to the development, clarification, and implementation of control-plane infrastructures and functionalities in ID enabled networks." <ideas.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ideas>, <mailto:ideas-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ideas/>
List-Post: <mailto:ideas@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ideas-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ideas>, <mailto:ideas-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2017 19:31:04 -0000

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 12:25 PM, Padma Pillay-Esnault <padma.ietf@gmail.com
> wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> (1) The work is insufficiently motivated. The claims about the need for
>>> the
>>> mapping system and the identity management system envisioned here do not
>>> appear
>>> to be backed up by those who have developed and deployed ID/LOC
>>> separation
>>> protocols. Nor do there seem to be compelling arguments that the
>>> framework that
>>> this proposed WG would produce would be the motivator for further
>>> interoperable
>>> deployments.
>>>
>>>
>>> This is simply not true. The IETF mailing lists are not finding the
>>> reach of interest that exists in the industry
>>>
>>
>
>>
>> Be that as it may, the determination of consensus and justification has
>> to be made primarily on what appears on the mailing lists and at meetings.
>>
>
> Why are we discounting the interest showed at the BOF?
>

I'm not, hence "mailing lists and at meetings".

However, based on the minutes, the BOF also seems to fall far short of
consensus:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/99/materials/minutes-99-ideas/

And of course the sentiment on the IETF list is rather more negative.

-Ekr


> Padma
>
>>
>> -Ekr
>>
>>
>>> Dino
>>>
>>>
>>
>