Re: Applying "Note Well" to side meetings

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Mon, 22 July 2019 17:13 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.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 93D9312008B for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 10:13:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.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 fbucJfEZDnWz for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 10:13:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vs1-xe2e.google.com (mail-vs1-xe2e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2e]) (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 475E112004D for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 10:13:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-vs1-xe2e.google.com with SMTP id v129so26674332vsb.11 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 10:13:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=3KyS61MFnnPQhoLlG+aHQkuT46wOLIpmuSexKSAx+KA=; b=dhOpsAmemrok8UJg8r9Th71GOUUKa1nHrW/BqvQSYZNi3KFtdlhFmWcj30L0JX7U2M 5nqIk1Rlus8VPqeSlE8Mkc93+MsPcgP0szOIKdXcY7gquJ9GI+YgmrVw4jj9JlPMhA/P JcyxjWolbYqseE094w9wQPG6LRHiVP8uMfFCZFqzF66RRjV1Esz4PikfKgfnlX6sscNu AysEXwrzjU3dt7ZUpOA3fTqR8kcuoTK7rmN0eRpXNpLEQ/7bYGruuzAfTqccvHVaYuZT AiakOce4YY+dCaIZpk/6DtllsV98GK4vOkkETsf596mjX/51tsgLd2SBcxk4FDSrLg1H xizQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to :content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=3KyS61MFnnPQhoLlG+aHQkuT46wOLIpmuSexKSAx+KA=; b=h6XnJyj4QDprkYFdDQz/BLAWX85Q6i2+ZWoh0Y6M/x0kvZDaZW+8a2ExJpYu2w963z epLxlve3yYvioLEKxLIPsK01Iew6iHE/SZS5lWborQl1fL2DzFbSdrFI9I00hio4elst FpIUwXovBbn+u/BJc5jkjxa8PgHHg0/tA53SETJKa9LTyO6jz7shBrwQB6Xai5p3qelb NQa1L9zvcZiw+xSuqhb81c0CuGhLi1gTv3J5+Uc3xkyOlJSOy9mdNHJ84HiQ5xOOqilP Cetxs1pC23S63cHF1rQgqzvX1/ZlR1RTwr4/W8cdLYlzfbC+7kILu0eYMpcVQDWnVyA3 3GeQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX8Gm3hzZETuJnpzN2LzLYuqRROFxm4o0HZ/aDWxUlkVCxXBkUM uLt0RQLI/17sdC77p57nN0ukK5wc
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqxQPbGPyUW5rLMkS/RKEapvCirW2DXkk94MiDbw4U36MWanh3qUGuTuKbP4+YjR3e9VlpTzrA==
X-Received: by 2002:a67:e244:: with SMTP id w4mr43717997vse.176.1563815612270; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 10:13:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [31.133.129.140] (dhcp-818c.meeting.ietf.org. [31.133.129.140]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d67sm11085063vkd.25.2019.07.22.10.13.31 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 22 Jul 2019 10:13:31 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Applying "Note Well" to side meetings
To: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>, Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>
Cc: IETF Rinse Repeat <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <007b01d53f2f$ef335830$cd9a0890$@olddog.co.uk> <DM6PR14MB282741D8727A72156457555AF8C50@DM6PR14MB2827.namprd14.prod.outlook.com> <63AC1040-37C8-4DAA-B222-1F166D333CF7@akamai.com> <CAL02cgRxxic78LeDKonAFMJKAuuXtYeZnScVJ6MXyPZFaZt7wA@mail.gmail.com> <20190722155714.GK24576@localhost>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <f01c71ef-eaf4-f1ea-fc8c-24826c1e1ff9@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2019 05:13:28 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20190722155714.GK24576@localhost>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/OuitOZx0NSxfC3w5UeqWN5395kg>
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, 22 Jul 2019 17:13:39 -0000

On 23-Jul-19 03:57, Nico Williams wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 21, 2019 at 06:25:12AM -0400, Richard Barnes wrote:
>> Maybe folks could provide a citation for this?  Because I have exactly the
>> opposite impression — that the Note Well only applies in contexts where it
>> is explicitly stated that it does, e.g., official sessions.
> 
> I've long understood that Note Well applies when and only when
> ('WWHEN'?) it is invoked, 

No. It's only a reminder of the IETF rules, and the rules apply to
all IETF activities -- all "contributions" in the IPR disclosure case.
See the earlier responses in this thread.

> and should be invoked whenever IETF work is
> discussed among participants with different employers even if the
> meeting is not an official IETF meeting.

Since it's only a reminder, it is indeed a "should" but not invoking
it doesn't cancel the rules.

    Brian

> 
> Depending on the cast of attendees I might not invoke Note Well in a
> side meeting with an unstated understanding that we're not out to screw
> each other on IP.  However, this is a bad habit, and I should always
> invoke Note Well when discussing IETF work or potential IETF work with
> colleagues from other organizations.  It's a bad habit not just because
> my friends might purposefully or otherwise screw me, but also because I
> might forget to invoke Note Well when others are around.
> 
> Official IETF meetings are (I guess) required to invoke the Note Well,
> whether they be interim or not, whether they be remote or not, but it
> still needs to be invoked in order to really apply.
> 
> Bar BoFs are unofficial meetings, and thus not required to invoke Note
> Well, thus too arguably there is no implied intent to have Note Well
> apply to them, which is why Note Well should be invoked explicitly.  My
> advice would be that Note Well always be invoked at the start of the bar
> BoF and in any email threads for organizing a bar BoF and any
> invitations sent (so that late arrivals understand the expectation that
> Note Well applies).
> 
> It must not be a common occurrence that bar BoF participants intend Note
> Well to _not_ apply.  It would be nice if Note Well could be made to
> impliedly apply by default, but I guess that's not feasible.> 
>> As Adrian says, there is a line.  I understood that line to be something
>> like, “The organizers of the meeting decide to apply Note Well”, just as
>> one might apply the Chatham House Rule.  So side meetings could be covered
>> if they chose, but not by default.
> 
> +1
> 
>> In any case, the premise for this thread seems a bit confused, since side
>> meetings are by definition not subject to IETF control.
> 
> A lot of work happens in bar BoFs though, so it's a fair question.  So
> either we shouldn't have them at all or we should acknowledge that they
> are a thing.  The IETF can't control a bar BoF, but a) it can provide
> advice about them, and b) it could provide rooms for ad-hoc BoFs with
> Note Well plastered on the walls :)
> 
> Nico
>