IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Mon, 24 September 2018 11:09 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.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 2ADE2130E77 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Sep 2018 04:09:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.39
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.39 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=opendkim.org header.b=bTqd9Fvl; dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.com header.b=GhTZnZE/
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 hYPYGlKKu8OQ for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Sep 2018 04:09:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF6C7130DC4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Sep 2018 04:09:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from DESKTOP-K6V9C2L.elandsys.com ([197.226.50.45]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id w8OB97JN027887 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 24 Sep 2018 04:09:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1537787359; x=1537873759; bh=Juwhu+0O/Y8gxd0lHqdBHLf5uNyh7lSgEsv1TBjwNQY=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=bTqd9FvlQj3R8iOi0J7v1WPsfBorttAmRxhzIaOhU1xQB0O1b+EWDO9LlPwG8CQsz bnLKmG5yPhY+RCeiosG5KcnV/bnhtt/pcAJFDsc0edjFp2yetW7nxUfHN88twg4TAa VT1UGMuBQRLRB6keRoTGffWl/owwx9E9t9qN6ozc=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1537787359; x=1537873759; i=@elandsys.com; bh=Juwhu+0O/Y8gxd0lHqdBHLf5uNyh7lSgEsv1TBjwNQY=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=GhTZnZE/XOPN4JyhDg4wsDWKjgc/e3WCsGtXH44+prl1EbUIunNnnJGwjTr/ZA8Lo 5Q9sHRy3LUypze2NHRAo/vvYbsJngwjZ6N1UzhOgx3hKkxlvusZSEcR0fTdqaCbSfq gu+7e+Rezr3S23eazoSvrn1EFW447iGiskUy8vW0=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20180924024544.0c251848@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2018 03:58:17 -0700
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, ietf@ietf.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Subject: Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs
In-Reply-To: <20180920233440.238CA20051DDE5@ary.qy>
References: <cafa1282-ae6a-93de-ea4a-d100af28d8b8@digitaldissidents.org> <20180920233440.238CA20051DDE5@ary.qy>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/5ecFfexBnuMu84kqdk_DhaQfUSs>
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: Mon, 24 Sep 2018 11:09:22 -0000

Hi John,
At 04:34 PM 20-09-2018, John Levine wrote:
>If this is really the best that HRPC can do, I would suggest that it's
>time for the IRTF to consider whether to shut it down.

[snip]

>There are real human rights problems that HRPC could engage with, but
>don't.  They need to make up their mind whether they're serious.

The charter of the research group states that one of the major aims 
of its research is to expose the relation between protocols and human 
rights with a focus on Article 19 and Article 20 of the UDHR.  There 
are opportunities for continued development in the research group's 
understanding of (IETF) protocols.  Some of the research seems to be 
optimized towards picking what is readily available instead of a 
systematic exploration of the issues.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email