Re: Terminology discussion threads

Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de> Thu, 13 August 2020 20:40 UTC

Return-Path: <eckert@i4.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
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 C611F3A0114 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 13:40:21 -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, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 LSDBxDHUEa5K for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 13:40:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.40]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5B7FD3A00F7 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 13:40:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de [131.188.34.52]) by faui40.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46FD8548621; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 22:40:14 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Postfix, from userid 10463) id 3F30A440059; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 22:40:14 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 22:40:14 +0200
From: Toerless Eckert <tte@cs.fau.de>
To: Michael StJohns <mstjohns@comcast.net>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Terminology discussion threads
Message-ID: <20200813204014.GC14418@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
References: <9ABDC2BC-E6A3-4249-99C5-F0BB3683A03D@ietf.org> <223A1539-30B0-424A-89D1-A968FFD4C140@symbolic.software> <aceec35c-ccc8-ccca-7a5b-7d23746f67e2@ietf.org> <A9BB633C-3278-406C-BD38-748646D7E454@symbolic.software> <C4BC10B5-6F65-451F-8B15-98AA8D54966A@ietf.org> <m2sgcq4fq1.wl-randy@psg.com> <20200813181549.GA27732@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <6EDEF995-7D31-42D4-83C7-B9C406962516@gmail.com> <20200813194819.GB14418@faui48f.informatik.uni-erlangen.de> <3af06ea0-5702-e357-2177-ea7de38f09c3@comcast.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <3af06ea0-5702-e357-2177-ea7de38f09c3@comcast.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/4hRNuN48GpnGGDeiFvoSaVUXjbo>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 20:40:22 -0000

On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 04:25:12PM -0400, Michael StJohns wrote:
> On 8/13/2020 3:48 PM, Toerless Eckert wrote:
> > At least there seems to be sufficient +1 from distinguished community
> > members such as current or past IAB, IESG members, IAB Liaison, IETF ISOC
> > appointee, IRTF and NomCom chair to hope that the action taken was rightfully
> > within the privilege of IETF chair according to the rules.
> 
> Mike StJohns, Past IAB, Past Nomcom Chair
> Scott Bradner, Past IAB, Past Area Director
> Randy Bush, Past Area Director
> Charlie Perkins,  Past IAB

Right.

> (sorry if I've missed other roles...)
> 
> So what's your point?

I am curious how there can be such a discrepancy even about
reading the rules. Are they badly written ?

Cheers
    Toerless

> In any event, my opinion is that this action was NOT taken "rightfully
> within the privilege of the IETF chair according to the rules", but I'm
> withholding further judgement until the Chair responds to my request to
> clarify which part of 3005 they believe applies and grants authority for a
> mass PR threat.
> 
> > 
> > If this step was ultimately determined (by whom... ?) not to be within
> > the privilege of IETF chair then i am bit worried about what i would
> > have to think about all those +1.
> 
> I'm not sure why.  Everyone has opinions.  Some are more useful than others,
> and each of us will have an opinion on that topic as well.
> 
> 
> Later, Mike