Re: Registration details for IETF 108

Vittorio Bertola <vittorio.bertola@open-xchange.com> Mon, 01 June 2020 17:12 UTC

Return-Path: <vittorio.bertola@open-xchange.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 61C6F3A12B1 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 10:12:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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=open-xchange.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 r_wVpipXtaE6 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 10:12:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx3.open-xchange.com (alcatraz.open-xchange.com [87.191.39.187]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5FE1C3A1288 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 10:12:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from open-xchange.com (imap.open-xchange.com [10.20.30.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx3.open-xchange.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E05A6A25C; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 19:12:10 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=open-xchange.com; s=201705; t=1591031530; bh=SwhuC8HbGg7ArHiJ/Z36s45Fzr/ewETip3ocNGOJeJg=; h=Date:From:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From; b=2l3L1zypJPDjgF1QqXmATZH8jUE5kK7lI4mxy6skbwKL2HJTB81MGZgIyY8BdyBF3 qRnW+1Jr/+Ng7EM/WcVC+hFkD9cDaRvVvSUIYOTajunB9cj1frn49bk/s5rA4fo9Qc WJMo+DSnXZeAoI7MjvY7cuIfvO7DAsi5Ll51Mz50ayIbXPxhMXKVHfdjCW1A5PKcUd bXABJv4gnT3KQWCswz+u0cUitMrOAijGH6O2o0uMwpxpvrmWvwUFaRPTj2PcZdV9po Fmak8mVMFFHijrhqaXfGjy4wZRKHKrRLK1X03aFWpSiXcmwBoSbVf6QZBf2r9sNw3m RnnioIlqmSeag==
Received: from appsuite-gw1.open-xchange.com (appsuite-gw1.open-xchange.com [10.20.28.81]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by open-xchange.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 701D13C0333; Mon, 1 Jun 2020 19:12:10 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2020 19:12:10 +0200 (CEST)
From: Vittorio Bertola <vittorio.bertola@open-xchange.com>
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>, ietf@ietf.org
Message-ID: <1428178670.10472.1591031530342@appsuite-gw1.open-xchange.com>
In-Reply-To: <D6AF5131729C554EA66DD64D@PSB>
References: <159062833754.6110.5826748635235943562@ietfa.amsl.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20200531121457.0b249858@elandnews.com> <CABcZeBOzVHaSZa0A3eDz12RwNuCiHtiJL8wqvAhhLPN6YEQOkQ@mail.gmail.com> <afa11959-3348-4054-409c-803824a2f332@gmail.com> <D6AF5131729C554EA66DD64D@PSB>
Subject: Re: Registration details for IETF 108
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
Importance: Normal
X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.10.3-Rev13
X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite
Autocrypt: addr=vittorio.bertola@open-xchange.com; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQENBFhFR+UBCACfoywFKBRfzasiiR9/6dwY36eLePXcdScumDMR8qoXvRS55QYDjp5bs+yMq41qWV9 xp/cqryY9jnvHbeF3TsE5yEazpD1dleRbkpElUBpPwXqkrSP8uXO9KkS9KoX6gdml6M4L+F82WpqYC1 uTzOE6HPmhmQ4cGSgoia2jolxAhRpzoYN99/BwpvoZeTSLP5K6yPlMPYkMev/uZlAkMMhelli9IN6yA yxcC0AeHSnOAcNKUr13yXyMlTyi1cdMJ4sk88zIbefxwg3PAtYjkz3wgvP96cNVwAgSt4+j/ZuVaENP pgVuM512m051j9SlspWDHtzrci5pBKKFsibnTelrABEBAAG0NUJlcnRvbGEsIFZpdHRvcmlvIDx2aXR 0b3Jpby5iZXJ0b2xhQG9wZW4teGNoYW5nZS5jb20+iQFABBMBAgAqBAsJCAcGFQoJCAsCBRYCAwEAAp 4BAhsDBYkSzAMABQMAAAAABYJYRUflAAoJEIU2cHmzj8qNaG0H/ROY+suCP86hoN+9RIV66Ej8b3sb8 UgwFJOJMupZfeb9yTIJwE4VQT5lTt146CcJJ5jvxD6FZn1Htw9y4/45pPAF7xLE066jg3OqRvzeWRZ3 IDUfJJIiM5YGk1xWxDqppSwhnKcMOuI72iioWxX0nGQrWxpnWJsjt08IEEwuYucDkul1PHsrLJbTd58 fiMKLVwag+IE1SPHOwkPF6arZQZIfB5ThtOZV+36Jn8Hok9XfeXWBVyPkiWCQYVX39QsIbr0JNR9kQy 4g2ZFexOcTe8Jo12jPRL7V8OqStdDes3cje9lWFLnX05nrfLuE0l0JKWEg8akN+McFXc+oV68h7nu5A Q0EWEVH5QEIAIDKanNBe1uRfk8AjLirflZO291VNkOAeUu+dIhecGnZeQW6htlDinlYOnXhtsY1mK9W PUu+xshDq7lXn2G0LxldYwyJYZaJtDgIKqVqwxfA34Lj27oqPuXwcvGhdCgt0SW/YcalRdAi0/AzUCu 5GSaj2kaGUSnBYYUP4szGJXjaK2psP5toQSCtx2pfSXQ6MaqPK9Zzy+D5xc6VWQRp/iRImodAcPf8fg JJvRyJ8Jla3lKWyvBBzJDg6MOf6Fts78bJSt23X0uPp93g7GgbYkuRMnFI4RGoTVkxjD/HBEJ0CNg22 hoHJondhmKnZVrHEluFuSnW0wBEIYomcPSPB+cAEQEAAYkBMQQYAQIAGwUCWEVH5QIbDAQLCQgHBhUK CQgLAgUJEswDAAAKCRCFNnB5s4/KjdO8B/wNpvWtOpLdotR/Xh4fu08Fd63nnNfbIGIETWsVi0Sbr8i E5duuGaaWIcMmUvgKe/BM0Fpj9X01Zjm90uoPrlVVuQWrf+vFlbalUYVZr51gl5UyUFHk+iAZCAA0WB rsmACKvuV1P7GuiX3UV9b59T9taYJxN3dNFuftrEuvsqHimFtlekUjUwoCekTJdncFusBhwz2OrKhHr WWrEsXkfh0+pURWYAlKlTxvXuI7gAfHEQM+6OnrWvXYtlhd0M1sBPnCjbyG63Qws7Rek9bEWKtH6dA6 dmT2FQT+g1S9Mdf0WkPTQNX0x24dm8IoHuD3KYwX7Svx43Xa17aZnXqUjtj1
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/9kKsO10wCzJkQfujobrDVIci0oA>
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, 01 Jun 2020 17:12:15 -0000


> Il 01/06/2020 18:44 John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> ha scritto:
> 
> (3) While I note that almost every posting since Melinda's
> comments excerpted below has concentrated on the fees, I think
> she has identified the important issue.  We continue to claim
> that decisions are made --not just checked or last-called -- on
> mailing lists, but that seems factually to have become less true
> in recent years.  

Indeed, as someone that started attending IETF meetings regularly only in the last few years, I did notice a clear disconnect between what the organization thinks it is and what it seems to be in practice (again, in my limited experience).

Even the continuously restated principle (already twice in this thread) that "people participate as individuals and not representatives of their companies" sounds IMHO a bit hypocritical in 2020. I do not doubt that participants strive to make proposals that represent what's best for the Internet in their view, but what you do and who you work for shape your view a lot. When different parts of the industry have conflicting views, that generally emerges in what their employees say "as individuals" - so there is no practical difference in the end.

I was seriously disconcerted when I realized that people that were replying to me from an anonymous Gmail address, with no signature except their given name, were in fact high ranking officers of some of the biggest companies around. Perhaps this is not perceived as a problem since most people here seem to have known each other for ages, but for people that do not know who is who, this approach is intransparent - a weird form of security by obscurity. It is another barrier to meaningful participation by outsiders.

> I hope the IETF never has to go down the path of identifying
> participants with specific categories of interests and insisting
> that participants from all categories be present whenever a
> discussion occurs or a decision is made, partially because such
> rules are a horribly blunt instrument.  However, other voluntary
> (and supposedly open) standards bodies have adopted exactly such
> rules when their assortment of barriers to participation and
> entry have grown high enough to raise suspicion that they have
> become big-player industry cabals and/or are in need of
> regulatory oversight and scrutiny from competitiveness and
> antitrust authorities.  As things evolve, let's at least be
> aware of those risks and make adjustments to our path
> accordingly.

The Internet is now a multi-billion-$currency industry that basically runs the world, and transparency, conflicts of interests, accessibility, diversity, inclusiveness etc should be top concerns when designing mechanisms for participation and deliberation. But the instruments you mention are indeed horribly blunt, so it would be great if this organization found new ways to deal with this in innovative ways.

-- 
Vittorio Bertola | Head of Policy & Innovation, Open-Xchange
vittorio.bertola@open-xchange.com 
Office @ Via Treviso 12, 10144 Torino, Italy