IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Required Google Account to review an IETF meeting. Really?

Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com> Tue, 03 June 2025 20:10 UTC

Return-Path: <sayrer@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietf@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C06813066099 for <ietf@mail2.ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Jun 2025 13:10:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.199
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.199 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AdmQ5gH6LtHA for <ietf@mail2.ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Jun 2025 13:10:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-x62d.google.com (mail-pl1-x62d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 53B67306608C for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Jun 2025 13:10:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-x62d.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-22c336fcdaaso49106595ad.3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 03 Jun 2025 13:10:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1748981456; x=1749586256; darn=ietf.org; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=c34mNVq9DM8Yyw10dIKre4D9CWCGdqdXhx19GKBR62k=; b=FkFwts62tfzjc0LeLoN9Wg29fc46VHZAAVKLO0ZN41qYFF53V0EVuYPZ0J6xEZrJ1t HqC87WI5VhL09YfkvsaW8JrQzoxxemv37Sn4MxJ3PECNSOA7LFnI2WicyeOcAydnum3u njENrQfdesyVkuvknX26rZYtcm5+LrWNmeNwATbA22RI3wdaYSvx+/rtIoRAr5sYJkGI l8qlFci17XaFC43yYCS4HHNcVZBEGC4Ow0+rUvUdWR+gGVTZwx7+UJrZovyQC8o67FmS VSSgsEawnvSBs93gpyHS3CiFJNgSxET6tt9/tFFbq5Z401GBqMRw9aBi5I01JFHFhTo8 G95A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1748981456; x=1749586256; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:mime-version:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=c34mNVq9DM8Yyw10dIKre4D9CWCGdqdXhx19GKBR62k=; b=eCfi7vsJw64MXvNePUEplA5+sEUgtPOenWJisUcxVYDxa/vm6jQe/1EbLZzOWfbwy+ Rkxwe5A3YEbrqtoMy8zm420+xfBw6Yd+G/wgvQj1MrKTSZAEeqfo39n2ncikabjKGzPf 48Ttl+mo//0SMPshc3cv9+peqWwVUsRBGKo4leqmb2hyBPmppR2nFx4s2VuXuxKWBMzR qEFH8WGyOckEZzS+guyaT40QOjIqFgJUAwgevRqAZG13Lz5I6nVp7DPlLEVJBmcM9aho +5aI7cIOHw36U34Q4xh04jrlSaEKzuFVqBbLwBlXMZMjhMLSFRjQWHaiYd6HuvLmvMo1 rXSw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yz99TCVvGmx+fi747yKeJQ5qI6NpA09mFfOAAxllU58Job/10wL +E+jcg+lH6KdKt+DnOw0/FeZCShRGdPBbS41GN74LsP2jOLD1cLHQJLufnC8UmXRbMIKaPp2QzC jEb46pA+2xDWSBkLz+dUIHCsHJe8fY21ATN3R
X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncuycE0v6TJufVOU0ANJdZOWNr+SDxsSw0Ifx8nL5KFKb7EfwdUzI4sLLkDTyIj nyEfoNnzU7A2Ml3gPg8jRvhxVw7rRfxDFScNzAM1Z55+UQ819pCZx9oGsrJtptrasSW7Iijbj8z LFn/rss9YKDtnKg2BUzXUl/xfsDhTI1sxqmg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGoJSQHqNUsZpSekG/1Fft8kj2RQZRKIla+h2dyEcQssAYmC/RMKybvH9fm6EPqM+VQWBEfKc4P4uSGX+OXqak=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:e807:b0:235:779:edfd with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-235e11fcc0emr1106965ad.39.1748981455972; Tue, 03 Jun 2025 13:10:55 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Jun 2025 13:10:45 -0700
X-Gm-Features: AX0GCFvEjVu1tWvK-r6cVyao-XbxUS66voIkIcynSSM8bQ9PNjGJhcauq0k8GFs
Message-ID: <CAChr6Szi-jjFqeLdnEBBOgYbfr_33jn06POL4RqnF7kbHj7o4g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Required Google Account to review an IETF meeting. Really?
To: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000066ec9a0636b07a34"
Message-ID-Hash: SUWOUO65GXW7CATVCJ47OY7ASGU5BHDY
X-Message-ID-Hash: SUWOUO65GXW7CATVCJ47OY7ASGU5BHDY
X-MailFrom: sayrer@gmail.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-ietf.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
List-Id: "IETF-Discussion. This is the most general IETF mailing list, intended for discussion of technical, procedural, operational, and other topics for which no dedicated mailing lists exist." <ietf.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/J9ruS1-k165_jQpoWUYvoaaa29w>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:ietf-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:ietf-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-leave@ietf.org>

Hi,

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> Bittorent is a protocol, not a service.  If you did this, where do you
> believe that the downloads would actually come from?

While I still am not sure that this is allowed, I found that we do have an
RFC about it. It has a good abstract and introduction.

<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc7574>

I am not sure if PPSPP took off, but any BitTorrent implementation tries to
do something similar.

"...It is based on the peer-to-peer paradigm, where clients consuming the
content
are put on equal footing with the servers initially providing the content,
to create a
system where everyone can potentially provide upload bandwidth..."

So, these things are not just protocols.

Can we put the RFCs, IDs, and meeting videos on there, as long as we retain
the Copyright and Note Well as appropriate?

thanks,
Rob

v2.35.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status