Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should the IETF respond?
Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Mon, 30 January 2017 04:15 UTC
Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A332129480 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Jan 2017 20:15:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 RdsoixRdbfvl for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Jan 2017 20:15:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg0-x22b.google.com (mail-pg0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c05::22b]) (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 CA225120727 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 29 Jan 2017 20:15:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id 194so97554178pgd.2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 29 Jan 2017 20:15:01 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:organization:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=U2LEVpGQOkxpjVB7wG53V7qIJnALBBA4+5SSrBvRXQY=; b=vIZ0ghRbCSIe5jZX0dMOsWZDhVa+g0YEddxrN0CqUWBhidXk2ieD7+6cj+gjAGyDOk X1rZz8XjRbFhO70FiPesjBw6cF3m8p9njzt+gBNCD4IN0pfB8sHeDlP3mvFkux1CQtjv g7UcWRejPpFjgdJobe5PHKNuQ8xmyvMXXPyU7/rYSP3vgVGBDHt9WDTVITcVgmnN9GFu nMkUALXLoJY7Imn8eZY3WEI5fzpT3KTxujQ2ZZmsBi0NQEV8+seNG4sO5rWYPNTF8w1R +XYVNca52lJQtWOmIJtGZ7EberScaBYgj4VAqeze5SvOZwCpQmBDnp0s4xZbMoXIcRRu Nvqg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=U2LEVpGQOkxpjVB7wG53V7qIJnALBBA4+5SSrBvRXQY=; b=f0d7UidAM8T46HV3Tk47/fIys/02R1rg6pvRFaK0cKBIxsTI5M6QrbuKFbC6H8DuZo bhaSgPSQqQGBs35zBZvsns1U9cegrFHK6vbeaPMAIvVF0WzH1gauP69pLKzYCPtKCnJu 9fCgPu996/6755T7YWRElwY8t3AiK9xN4RFoTmLLY7hAMQF7GgzleKd9GXUw/Ju4y0/H UWH5ZFyeW4J0+XQX9wOnoXWOm22yKH7qxwdeJie9OsoaJ7Tdd3cL28pYG4cqb8fzyfP4 3Uuj8Y3tHiotNxnQT6ikN/p1W9vMe5Imc+iHGaiBqG6bsRF7GpW3exeqH6fWFWNKEkv+ 68SQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXIC9fJjYZWedDKBIi4UYqG8LeT/okMQ5qfSunbfnVXXhbVXTpthhRnPTr2X0XOFxw==
X-Received: by 10.98.48.66 with SMTP id w63mr20821563pfw.179.1485749701022; Sun, 29 Jan 2017 20:15:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.178.21] ([118.148.114.240]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j7sm27684736pfe.84.2017.01.29.20.14.59 for <ietf@ietf.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 29 Jan 2017 20:15:00 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should the IETF respond?
To: ietf@ietf.org
References: <CAAUuzMQwk5v+3HA+KFrsCZfbNSXFpgBE0XdKfJWHgDss9-VkTw@mail.gmail.com> <CAHw9_iJ78ECZ5x8LsR53KhRFnbhi3gV7n8yzG07e1wbN-SG14Q@mail.gmail.com> <8f5ef9ac-b62b-863a-0a0e-f5d2b329de09@nostrum.com> <1316f6a4-535d-0805-0e01-57eb3ef2a8d6@secure-endpoints.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <e0dc8991-8766-e12e-784b-67536f087293@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 17:14:56 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1316f6a4-535d-0805-0e01-57eb3ef2a8d6@secure-endpoints.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/3dyTzLHaZw7ZFfgD8EsuvND831s>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2017 04:15:03 -0000
On 30/01/2017 16:49, Jeffrey Altman wrote: ... > The IETF is an international organization whose members... Not actually. The IETF is not an international organization (I know, because I used to work for one) and it doesn't have members. Legally, it's unclear that it's an organization at all, or in which country it might be based. I also suspect that for some days or weeks, getting a straight answer about the impact on IETF98 attendees may be impossible, but I agree that the IASA should ask. Regards Brian On 30/01/2017 16:49, Jeffrey Altman wrote: > Actually, I think there is something for the I* bodies to do. > They should be contacting the State Department, the Dept of Homeland > Security, and the relevant Congressional representatives to make them > aware of the upcoming meeting and request clarification of the impact > the Executive Action of the POTUS will have on the meeting. This should > be done for same reasons that the sports leagues are inquiring. The > IETF is an international organization whose members could find > themselves in legal jeopardy by attempting to travel as a participant. > > Jeffrey Altman > > > On 1/28/2017 5:35 PM, Adam Roach wrote: >> I think this highlights a gap between mtgvenue (which is producing >> documents that will provide guidance to the IAOC on venue selection, >> typically years in advance of the actual meetings) and the >> practicalities about what happens if the facts on the ground change >> non-trivially in the interim. >> >> For example; from the reporting I'm reading [1], the United States will, >> at the time of the upcoming Chicago meeting, still have in effect an >> executive order that precludes entry of any kind for nationals of seven >> named countries. Looking back over the past several IETF meetings, I see >> at least 18 distinct attendees (12 from Iran, 2 from Libya, 2 from >> Somalia, 1 from Yemen, and 1 from Sudan) who would be barred from >> attending the Chicago meeting in person. >> >> I think the broader question that Dave is asking -- and this lies way >> outside the mtgvenue charter -- is: when this happens, is there any >> specific action that any I* body should take? It's not clear to me that >> there are any practical actions to take: it's obviously impractical to >> cancel or move the meeting with this much notice. >> >> Which is to say: I don't think there's anything to do, but I think it's >> a valid question to ask, and I think the general IETF list is as >> appropriate a venue as any other. >> >> /a >> >> ____ >> [1] e.g., >> https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/us/politics/refugee-muslim-executive-order-trump.html >> >> >> On 1/27/17 13:40, Warren Kumari wrote: >>> If only we had some sort of a list or working group where things like >>> meeting venues could be discussed. >>> >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/mtgvenue/documents/ >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mtgvenue >>> https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/mtgvenue/current/maillist.html >>> >>> W >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Dave Burstein <daveb@dslprime.com> >>> wrote: >>>> Folks >>>> >>>> The IETF has generally steered clear of political entanglements, which I >>>> think wise. Nonetheless, I raise the question of whether we should >>>> respond >>>> to the proposed U.S. ban on nationals of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, >>>> Sudan, >>>> Syria, Yemen. >>>> >>>> Scott Aaronson reports one of his MIT students will probably have to >>>> leave >>>> if he can't get his visa removed. We all know how many Iranians are >>>> world-class technologists, including in computer science and electrical >>>> engineering. >>>> >>>> I hope many from outside the United States speak up. The issues >>>> around Trump >>>> make it hard to be objective here. >>>> >>>> Should we take a stand? >>>> >>>> If so, should it be symbolic or substantive? >>>> >>>> Symbolic actions could include: >>>> >>>> A resolution >>>> Establishing remote hubs for our meetings in Iran and one of the Arabic >>>> speaking countries. ISOC has funded remote hubs. >>>> Outreach in Farsi and Arabic to show that whatever actions the >>>> government >>>> takes, the IETF welcomes participation. This could be as simple as Jari >>>> Arkko writing a letter to the editor of the leading newspapers with an >>>> invitation for all to join our work. >>>> >>>> Some might also think that we should move the July 2018 meeting from San >>>> Francisco to a location accessible to more of our members, perhaps to >>>> Mexico >>>> or Canada. >>>> ------------ >>>> >>>> As we discuss this, I urge everyone to avoid distracting comments >>>> about U.S. >>>> politics. We're not going to change many minds here pro or con the >>>> new U.S. >>>> President. >>>> >>>> Instead, let's keep the discussion here to how we should respond to a >>>> major >>>> nation refusing visas to so many of our members. >>>> >>>> Dave Burstein >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Editor, Fast Net News, 5GW News, Net Policy News and DSL Prime >>>> Author with Jennie Bourne DSL (Wiley) and Web Video: Making It Great, >>>> Getting It Noticed (Peachpit) >>> >>> >> >
- If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should the IE… Dave Burstein
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Warren Kumari
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Andrew Sullivan
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Hosnieh Rafiee
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Melinda Shore
- Re: If [removed] are blocked by the [removed], sh… S Moonesamy
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Clint Chaplin
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Emily Shepherd
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Adam Roach
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Paul Wouters
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Melinda Shore
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Rich Kulawiec
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… nalini.elkins
- Re: If [removed] are blocked by the [removed], sh… S Moonesamy
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… John Leslie
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Jari Arkko
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… Stephen Farrell
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… Dave Crocker
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… George Michaelson
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… Melinda Shore
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Jeffrey Altman
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… nalini.elkins
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Brian E Carpenter
- RE: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Roni Even
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Melinda Shore
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… John C Klensin
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Randy Bush
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Naeem Khademi
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… Naeem Khademi
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Leif Johansson
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… Leif Johansson
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… Stewart Bryant
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Dave Cridland
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Leif Johansson
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Christer Holmberg
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Niels ten Oever
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Rich Kulawiec
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… David Farmer
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… nalini.elkins
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Walid AL-SAQAF
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Randy Bush
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Niels ten Oever
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Melinda Shore
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Michael StJohns
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Alia Atlas
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… John C Klensin
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Melinda Shore
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Christian de Larrinaga
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Saifi Khan
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Paul Wouters
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Rich Kulawiec
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Jari Arkko
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Jari Arkko
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Emily Shepherd
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… Dan Harkins
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Emily Shepherd
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… Randy Bush
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Alejandro Acosta
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… Dan Harkins
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… Randy Bush
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Arturo Servin
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… Dan Harkins
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… Matthew Kerwin
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Jari Arkko
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Naeem Khademi
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Jari Arkko
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… S Moonesamy
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… Stephen Farrell
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… Tim Chown
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… Jari Arkko
- Re: If categories of people are blocked by the U.… nalini.elkins
- Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should th… Bless, Roland (TM)