IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IAB agendas now public

Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@lucidvision.com> Wed, 05 September 2018 21:13 UTC

Return-Path: <tnadeau@lucidvision.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 BDDB212426A for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 14:13:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=lucidvision.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 bbKwPm0bQPk5 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 14:13:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lucidvision.com (mail.lucidvision.com [78.31.106.147]) (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 202A3127332 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Sep 2018 14:13:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lucidvision.com; s=default; t=1536181425; bh=Qsy2XmKk/o28oTV/qK2+FwAqBEROjkHLwo6ZQ4SdEYE=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=11/ysRzagZxjHd8VOLy00thJJbCGaA8pT7IY+b2HFHCnmcaypAdzw75Q0F+600s/h RuNqBoKTWbZk9cu33q0h+zdOlWr91M36VzML2hJsiO52SFmnJYD75fMuWt88fE0mPM 0ocF9ZZbNSu0Nm+Nv3YGBBulBb4ZX6WEDXWRDGM8=
X-Default-Received-SPF: pass (skip=loggedin (res=PASS)) x-ip-name=76.24.61.197;
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
Subject: Re: IAB agendas now public
From: Thomas Nadeau <tnadeau@lucidvision.com>
In-Reply-To: <m2a7ovmzgk.wl-randy@psg.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Sep 2018 17:13:28 -0400
Cc: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>, IAB Chair <iab-chair@iab.org>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <9FA1C537-0B62-431F-B059-03C0813890CE@lucidvision.com>
References: <b4afddcc-e8dc-9bd8-03d3-6374c29c4749@iab.org> <m2a7ownhl0.wl-randy@psg.com> <BC35696A-D4A6-47EA-A85C-EB472E42596E@lucidvision.com> <CA+9kkMCGNpFQGwEYZzn3CcOAdz_-GGMCP-N4jX_YuJ8tri0Bxw@mail.gmail.com> <fffabcb8-ee6f-d90b-f661-9011088b892b@gmail.com> <m2a7ovmzgk.wl-randy@psg.com>
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
X-Authenticated-User: tnadeau@lucidvision.com
X-Info: aspam skipped due to (g_smite_skip_relay)
X-Encryption: SSL encrypted
X-MyRbl: Color=White (rbl) Age=0 Spam=0 Notspam=0 Stars=0 Good=0 Friend=0 Surbl=0 Catch=0 r=0 ip=76.24.61.197
X-IP-stats: Incoming Last 0, First 161, in=690, out=0, spam=0 ip=76.24.61.197
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/CY8Ioindhelag-thfLR3jMZcNIo>
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: Wed, 05 Sep 2018 21:13:35 -0000

I totally agree with Randy.  The one distinction is between observing these
discussions and being allowed to partake in them. I can understand that you
folks might want to limit discussion at IAB meetings to the IAB membership,
and then have designated open comment/discussion later where anyone can comment.
That is fair, but there should be few exceptions where the IAB discussions/debates 
should be behind closed doors such as for HR/legal matters.

—Tom



> On Sep 5, 2018, at 5:00 PM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
> 
>> But there are quite a lot of issues the IAB has to handle that are not
>> part of its architecture remit and that do have a political
>> angle. Replay the great ICANN/IANA saga a couple of years ago, for
>> example. I fear that either the IAB would have been very inhibited in
>> its discussions, or they would mainly have been held in executive
>> sessions.
> 
> i beg to differ.  heck, forget the begging :)
> 
> when it is a personnel or analogous issue, sure
> 
> but when it affects our community, it should be open.  and 'politics'
> affects our community.  the icann/iana saga should have been open.
> the ietf prides itself on being open.  well, we should walk the walk.
> 
> btw, politics is what happens when more than one person is involved.
> 
> randy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email