RE: my summary of discussion regarding IETF #100

"Tony Hain" <alh-ietf@tndh.net> Wed, 01 June 2016 18:10 UTC

Return-Path: <alh-ietf@tndh.net>
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 2FBBB12D0A8 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Jun 2016 11:10:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.217
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.217 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1056-bit key) reason="fail (bad RSA signature)" header.d=tndh.net
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 M9AcQ8oyZ7fO for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 Jun 2016 11:10:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from express.tndh.net (express.tndh.net [IPv6:2001:470:e930:1240:20d:56ff:fe04:4c0a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 53FD712D09D for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Jun 2016 11:10:42 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tndh.net; s=dkim; h=Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Date:In-Reply-To:References:Cc:To:From; bh=8asWenidGqfyr0omL54el9/gFP6cgJwAwCKSrBSEXvo=; b=AKweePi/h8FqYepEOVs5mjRWXGGGa97ygh/zY1du9RQHZo7n1wnHfzM4INf7TQYQ7CA7GPlEp0qsFoIL+7yPPPSoBlffrDScSYRYhrOp7DtYaKT19OOBNdoZhi+I2mb6CSHFnSbTatXEjKXjig6HVAGJ0z7U+QZOGJYUwzY57F2t9HHp;
Received: from express.tndh.net ([2001:470:e930:1240:20d:56ff:fe04:4c0a] helo=eaglet) by express.tndh.net with esmtp (Exim 4.72 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <alh-ietf@tndh.net>) id 1b8Ab6-0007QR-2S; Wed, 01 Jun 2016 11:10:39 -0700
From: "Tony Hain" <alh-ietf@tndh.net>
To: "'Dean Willis'" <dean.willis@softarmor.com>, "'Jari Arkko'" <jari.arkko@piuha.net>
References: <AB5E1CF9-52C7-46E1-A430-C0E65793728E@piuha.net> <642F95F1-96E8-4ADE-8251-89ADBDC22430@softarmor.com>
In-Reply-To: <642F95F1-96E8-4ADE-8251-89ADBDC22430@softarmor.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 11:10:25 -0700
Message-ID: <1a8801d1bc30$df1962d0$9d4c2870$@tndh.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQKzK+NenNzyMunypDUOYfD0LKYofQG/SvdTngQOvIA=
Content-Language: en-us
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 2001:470:e930:1240:20d:56ff:fe04:4c0a
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: alh-ietf@tndh.net
Subject: RE: my summary of discussion regarding IETF #100
X-SA-Exim-Version: 4.2
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes (on express.tndh.net)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/7mBl_cisi1wm2kHkw5rSHOx0v6A>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
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: Wed, 01 Jun 2016 18:10:44 -0000

+1 (including the hat)

Issues beyond those critical for getting work done SHOULD be used to select
between otherwise equal venues in a region, but MUST NOT be used as the
primary discriminators. 

Tony


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ietf [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dean Willis
> Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 6:40 PM
> To: Jari Arkko
> Cc: ietf@ietf.org Discussion
> Subject: Re: my summary of discussion regarding IETF #100
> 
> 
> > On May 28, 2016, at 12:49, Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net>; wrote:
> >
> >
> > Several people have pointed out that it is very important that the IETF
> treats everyone's issues the same. I'd point out though that not everyone
> reacts in the same fashion, e.g., we need to be aware of people who are or
> have been silent about their issues, attempt to identify such issues, and
> consider those as well, fairly, *while* still needing to find a reasonable
set
> of real-world venues.
> >
> 
> <cowboy hat on>
> 
> No, we don't. If they aren't the sort of issues that prevent real work
from
> getting done in the IETF, we do NOT need to be identifying or considering
> them.
> 
> This is not a social club. It is not a debating forum. It is not a
junket-factory
> for family-friendly excursions. It is work, and work is hard and requires
> sacrifice.
> 
> I understand that it is trendy for everyone to need safe-spaces, group
hugs,
> and lemon-scented-napkins before takeoff these days, but this is getting
> ridiculous.
> 
> Being able to get through customs at a destination, being able to afford
that
> destination, and being safe once one gets there are critical issues.
Adequate
> meeting, hospitality, and bandwidth accommodations are critical issues.
> 
> Most of the rest of this debate needs to be taken somewhere else. Sure, we
> can each have personal concerns about how to get more of our clique-du-
> jour into the process, but that, in general, is something the IETF as a
whole
> needs to avoid wasting time on.
> 
> So stop being a silly wanker, kick some ass, and call an end to playtime.
> Everybody back to work!
> 
> <cowboy hat off>
> 
> -
> Dean