Re: bettering open source involvement
Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> Fri, 29 July 2016 14:26 UTC
Return-Path: <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
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 7A44F12DDA2 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 07:26:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.588
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.588 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_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cs.tcd.ie
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 gmEXiFK9OunO for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 07:26:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [134.226.56.6]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6E4112D50E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 07:26:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTP id 616C8BE3F; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 15:26:20 +0100 (IST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at scss.tcd.ie
Received: from mercury.scss.tcd.ie ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mercury.scss.tcd.ie [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 12hVKCiOw9hN; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 15:26:18 +0100 (IST)
Received: from [192.168.1.5] (95-45-153-252-dynamic.agg2.phb.bdt-fng.eircom.net [95.45.153.252]) by mercury.scss.tcd.ie (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2DF83BE39; Fri, 29 Jul 2016 15:26:18 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cs.tcd.ie; s=mail; t=1469802378; bh=EtTHq4AfcOtSCJ7pPbk3jFYcF3qrjDui6ocqHFTqMe4=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=dmYboQeaLtK12yo5ebamZjfCbAidLdu03ooAlEQeVTaEbyMJNTsZol2f23oBMHRQy dpyhfu25DdFLKH6l93IhqWnXsLcQWbnBvKgxLPDWltMuBpsvOwrpm7x9YgrHPEQWMa T4ax4ac6nKhqAbeNBvRBL/je52p62JL74R+6S4iU=
Subject: Re: bettering open source involvement
To: "MH Michael Hammer (5304)" <MHammer@ag.com>, Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>
References: <CAA93jw71iUPb4vuFK5sMqo_CQEE9HSkchc9988=98FKUsv_1sw@mail.gmail.com> <CABSMSPUoBGgD6ioiCOScUUEnTUnGiNAYPavONyLpbWzNcRhvsg@mail.gmail.com> <42310584-34a6-5efc-59c3-ff7e7ec77624@gmail.com> <61563BA8-6790-43DE-B670-7040F206B9C9@gmail.com> <d56478d7-ae5c-381b-fd52-ee41d9a56358@gmail.com> <e4c113cd-dd59-5e02-39ff-70cf0896bfd9@gmail.com> <16aa8266-6856-93db-9a10-e3f5f30d2b93@gmail.com> <CE39F90A45FF0C49A1EA229FC9899B05266E238E@USCLES544.agna.amgreetings.com> <CAG4d1rcBd7HK=Vmu3DJVd7Gat8PT-zeMvG89t30zMCwbSYjFfw@mail.gmail.com> <CE39F90A45FF0C49A1EA229FC9899B05266E2B91@USCLES544.agna.amgreetings.com>
From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Openpgp: id=D66EA7906F0B897FB2E97D582F3C8736805F8DA2; url=
Message-ID: <232600fd-0c24-5065-f952-a32920219d3a@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2016 15:26:17 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CE39F90A45FF0C49A1EA229FC9899B05266E2B91@USCLES544.agna.amgreetings.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha-256"; boundary="------------ms050303010002060907090502"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/Qx53eVutSDJle166g6kFgsLwsMQ>
Cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Fri, 29 Jul 2016 14:26:24 -0000
On 29/07/16 14:56, MH Michael Hammer (5304) wrote: > Alia, > > Thanks for the thoughtful response. Submitting a draft is indeed a > reasonably quick process. But that is only the starting point. My > IETF experience is mainly in the area of email authentication so > perhaps that colors my perception. I can’t think of anyone that > didn’t walk away from the MARID working group (SPF and SenderID) > without a sour taste in their mouth. It can be summed up by saying > politics and religious wars. I look at how long it took for DKIM to > go from draft to standard – without looking up the exact dates > I’ll call it something around 8 years. ADSP was a painful > experience all the way around and a time suck. I’ll not go into > DMARC which has become implemented widely yet ran into fierce > resistance within portions of the IETF community. I’m part of the > DMARC team that came out with it and the goal was to open up > something that was working among private peers so that any person > organization of any size could benefit. Instead of working to help > address the corner cases, there was an intense effort on the part of > some to kill it off and/or stonewall despite increasing acceptance > and implementation in the wild. FWIW, I don't think the above is a sufficiently complete description of the DMARC situation. I do get that that was the perception of some DMARC proponents but it ignores the fact that DMARC specifically affects how the IETF does work. I do fully agree wrt ADSP but I think in retrospect even those who were proponents of ADSP would now likely agree it was a mistake. I could similarly quibble about what you say of DKIM, but am thankful that I wasn't involved in MARID at all;-) So I figure there are a wide range of reasonable opinions that could be expressed about many bits of work done or not done in the IETF. I think a conclusion to reach is that sometimes it's just hard when one brings work from a smaller group to a group as broad and diverse as the IETF, and that does fairly often badly affect proposals that come from smaller OSS or operator groups. S. > > It appears that rather than trying to find ways to reduce friction, > the attitude is that people must dedicate their lives to the IETF > alter in order to get things done. Part of this is because to some > extent IETF is driven by people who are paid by their organizations > to be full time IETFers. My company allows my participation in IETF > working groups (as well as other places) but does not “sponsor†> it. This isn’t a complaint but rather, recognition of reality. Is > it any wonder that so many people who get involved in the IETF > because of one particular thing end up walking away from standards > work? > > Perhaps my perspective is somewhat jaundiced yet I continue to > participate in working groups. > > I’ve been working on some ideas (surprisingly not in the email or > security arenas) that would at first glance appear to be naturals for > bringing to the IETF yet I am hesitant because I would likely expire > of old age before seeing them get through the process. Life is too > short. > > Just a few thoughts before I duck and run for cover from an > anticipated backlash. > > Mike > > From: Alia Atlas [mailto:akatlas@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, July 29, > 2016 9:04 AM To: MH Michael Hammer (5304) Cc: Melinda Shore; Brian E > Carpenter; Suzanne Woolf; IETF discussion list Subject: Re: bettering > open source involvement > > Hi Melinda & Michael, > > On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 1:51 AM, MH Michael Hammer (5304) > <MHammer@ag.com<mailto:MHammer@ag.com>> wrote: > > >> -----Original Message----- From: ietf >> [mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org<mailto:ietf-bounces@ietf.org>] On >> Behalf Of Melinda Shore Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2016 10:31 PM To: >> Brian E Carpenter; Suzanne Woolf Cc: IETF discussion list Subject: >> Re: bettering open source involvement >> >> On 7/28/16 1:06 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >>> And there's our problem, right there. Protocols without APIs are >>> pretty much useless these days. IPv6 without a socket API would >>> have been an abject failure. Without RFC 2133, RFC 2292 and >>> their successors, who knows how the POSIX and Winsock support for >>> IPv6 would have turned out? >> >> Not specifying APIs in the IETF clearly doesn't mean that there are >> no APIs, clearly. >> >> I'm certainly open to the possibility that we start tackling APIs >> but I'm not sure it's a terrific idea. For one thing, we already >> have too much work. For another, I'm not sure we'd produce >> particularly good APIs. It's a different skill from developing and >> specifying network protocols. And thirdly, I'm not convinced that >> the people implementing our protocols would want IETF- developed >> APIs. >> >> This is completely subjective but my own sense is that the #1 >> problem we have related to open source projects we take years to >> produce specifications. >> > > This! +1000 > > That certainly aligns with what I've heard as well, but can I poke > into a bit more. I know that, for instance, I can get a draft from > written to the RFC Editor in 6 weeks, if it isn't controversial. > Most of that time is to allow adequate review at the WG, IETF Last > Call, directorates and IESG levels. > > My sense is that the rest of the time goes to the WG process which > has aspects of: a) Getting people interested in the idea b) Having > folks cycle in and out of paying attention and commenting c) Having > authors/editors be distracted and unresponsive. d) Having WG Chairs > be distracted/unresponsive and want more discussion first. e) > Avoiding having actively hard discussions about contentious points. > f) (sometimes) waiting for implementations to sanity-check > > It feels like a WG group or topic in a fixed area with agreement > could get past many of these slow-downs - if there were general > agreement and a culture in that WG of doing so. > > We aren't, after all, doomed to repeat the delays of the past :-) > which isn't to say that this would be easy. > > What do you think? Are there factors that I'm missing? Is there a > technical topic where there could be enthusiasm to push? > > Regards, Alia >
- Re: bettering open source involvement Charles Eckel (eckelcu)
- Re: bettering open source involvement Randy Bush
- Re: bettering open source involvement Harald Alvestrand
- Re: bettering open source involvement ned+ietf
- Re: bettering open source involvement Brian E Carpenter
- Re: bettering open source involvement Michael Richardson
- Re: bettering open source involvement Ted Lemon
- Re: bettering open source involvement Melinda Shore
- Re: bettering open source involvement Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: bettering open source involvement Alia Atlas
- Re: bettering open source involvement Alia Atlas
- RE: bettering open source involvement MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: bettering open source involvement joel jaeggli
- Re: bettering open source involvement Dave Taht
- Summary: bettering open source involvement S Moonesamy
- Re: bettering open source involvement Michael Richardson
- Re: bettering open source involvement Dave Taht
- Re: bettering open source involvement Philip Homburg
- Re: bettering open source involvement Stephen Farrell
- Re: bettering open source involvement Dave Taht
- Re: bettering open source involvement Randy Bush
- Re: bettering open source involvement Brian E Carpenter
- Re: bettering open source involvement Michael Richardson
- Re: bettering open source involvement Ted Lemon
- Re: bettering open source involvement Yoav Nir
- Re: bettering open source involvement Dave Taht
- Re: bettering open source involvement Riccardo Bernardini
- Re: bettering open source involvement Stephen Farrell
- Re: bettering open source involvement Eggert, Lars
- Re: bettering open source involvement Dave Taht
- Re: bettering open source involvement Dave Taht
- Re: bettering open source involvement Charles Eckel (eckelcu)
- Re: bettering open source involvement Brian E Carpenter
- Re: bettering open source involvement Doug Ewell
- Re: bettering open source involvement Brian E Carpenter
- Re: bettering open source involvement Eggert, Lars
- Re: bettering open source involvement Paul Wouters
- Re: bettering open source involvement Joel M. Halpern
- Re: bettering open source involvement Alia Atlas
- Re: bettering open source involvement Livingood, Jason
- Re: bettering open source involvement Livingood, Jason
- Re: bettering open source involvement Livingood, Jason
- Re: bettering open source involvement Ted Lemon
- Re: bettering open source involvement Brian E Carpenter
- Re: bettering open source involvement Randy Bush
- Re: bettering open source involvement Dave Taht
- Re: bettering open source involvement HANSEN, TONY L
- Re: bettering open source involvement Brian E Carpenter
- RE: bettering open source involvement MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: bettering open source involvement Randy Bush
- Re: bettering open source involvement Melinda Shore
- Re: bettering open source involvement Andy Bierman
- Re: bettering open source involvement Stephen Farrell
- RE: bettering open source involvement MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: bettering open source involvement Stephen Farrell
- Re: bettering open source involvement Alia Atlas
- Re: bettering open source involvement Alia Atlas
- Re: bettering open source involvement Riccardo Bernardini
- Re: bettering open source involvement Dave Taht
- RE: bettering open source involvement MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: bettering open source involvement Melinda Shore
- Re: bettering open source involvement Bjoern A. Zeeb
- Re: bettering open source involvement Brian E Carpenter
- Re: bettering open source involvement Alia Atlas
- Re: bettering open source involvement S Moonesamy
- Re: bettering open source involvement Michael Richardson
- Re: bettering open source involvement Octavio Alvarez
- Re: bettering open source involvement Riccardo Bernardini
- RE: bettering open source involvement MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: bettering open source involvement Melinda Shore
- Re: bettering open source involvement Suzanne Woolf
- Re: bettering open source involvement Bjoern A. Zeeb
- Re: bettering open source involvement Riccardo Bernardini
- bettering open source involvement Dave Taht