IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms

Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> Tue, 03 September 2019 11:40 UTC

Return-Path: <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
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 670AC120132 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 04:40:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 l2_a1msG_mGZ for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 04:40:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp [131.112.32.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 7DB2B12006F for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 04:40:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 19319 invoked from network); 3 Sep 2019 11:27:53 -0000
Received: from necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp (HELO ?127.0.0.1?) (131.112.32.132) by necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp with SMTP; 3 Sep 2019 11:27:53 -0000
Subject: Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms
To: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
References: <2D3C4495-F61A-4616-82B7-4A7AF36EC282@cooperw.in> <c94ab19a-249a-e544-694e-5e94ded380a4@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp> <1DDF286E-56A9-43F2-8FEA-CB5D8CA1BB84@cooperw.in>
From: Masataka Ohta <mohta@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Message-ID: <803f2da4-639e-8515-9bcf-6ba4da1cb175@necom830.hpcl.titech.ac.jp>
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2019 20:40:15 +0900
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1DDF286E-56A9-43F2-8FEA-CB5D8CA1BB84@cooperw.in>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-2022-jp"; format="flowed"; delsp="yes"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/KMow0QrkbDLJ2iDvXQx0XmPxEmA>
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: Tue, 03 Sep 2019 11:40:22 -0000

Alissa Cooper wrote:

>>> During this interim period, a personal wish of mine would be to
>>> not have every message sent by the SAA challenged and adjudicated
>>> on ietf@ietf.org <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>.
>>
>> It sounds like you have authorized SAAs send messages, including
>> private ones with chilling effect, not supported by IETF consensus.
> 
> Nope. The SAA are operating under RFC 3005.

Hmmm, but a problem is that some SAAs wrongly interpret the rfc.

However, as I should not assume you are weasel wording, you should
be saying SAAs should operate under *THE* original, unaffected by
recent arguments, intention of the rfc repeatedly expressed by Bob
Hinden.

Thank you very much for the clarification.

						Masataka Ohta

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email