Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Wed, 24 February 2021 08:21 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.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 054253A109C for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 00:21:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.214
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.214 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, LOTS_OF_MONEY=0.001, MONEY_NOHTML=1.481, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, US_DOLLARS_3=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.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 LJyBCo-BJrrg for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 00:21:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.elandsys.com (mx.elandsys.com [162.213.2.210]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 373693A1093 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 24 Feb 2021 00:21:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from DESKTOP-K6V9C2L.elandsys.com ([102.115.185.46]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.15.2/8.14.5) with ESMTPSA id 11O8LDZ9027225 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 24 Feb 2021 00:21:23 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1614154887; x=1614241287; i=@elandsys.com; bh=EMJFPDlkYtl1rYJ5G+DkrDyvaPGC6n2JDGSk/ZtXNWg=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=z7a0FBSnWypM5liZWjEXw6RLUJA0JWurVden+ucHaFJUsa7FMwUZNFabWfXk5oG49 fIC5ZM9Ajf8q0YJNIAjJkCDFRTtm/ymFM56ZH8jVbPAHktI4xVo+5Uog4DbV3XXqQU EJtwQIq0kg8FDFx6/ZinEo7GFFB1q48VB/+XHpQo=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20210223224545.12cf9ca0@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2021 00:15:08 -0800
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>, Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>, ietf@ietf.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Subject: Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF
In-Reply-To: <37eecb9b-f0eb-e21c-b162-b1f0339e4981@si6networks.com>
References: <37eecb9b-f0eb-e21c-b162-b1f0339e4981@si6networks.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/SOW9WKeMBNBeTZh8rRLqbaWEvP0>
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, 24 Feb 2021 08:21:35 -0000

Hi Fernando, Keith,
At 04:07 PM 22-02-2021, Fernando Gont wrote:
>We have submitted a new I-D, entitled "Diversity and Inclusiveness 
>in the IETF".

Thanks for submitting an I-D about the topic.  Some of the issues in 
the draft were identified previously: http://r.elandsys.com/r/49289

Companies operating at the regional or local level do not see the ROI 
(Section 4).  The problem is more complicated than that.  The 
approach taken was to provide aid through fellowships.  The 
organization which provided fellowships was not too happy about the 
IETF reviewing that.  There was some past feedback for the 
"university problem".  There was someone who explained the 
problem.  I don't remember whether it was fixed.

There has been suggestions over the years to provide summaries of 
discussions instead of sticking to "read the archives".

The stance over the years was that attendance fees are to support the 
IETF.  That could have been true in the past.  The total meeting 
revenue in 2018 was USD 3,908,825 and the total meeting expenses was 
3,089,369.  I doubt that the IETF would be cover its expenses if it 
relied on meeting attendance to cover its expenses.

As a comment about IETF culture, I see people using it as a reference 
for other groups to follow.  In my opinion, it might be viewed as 
offensive or against the social norms of the group.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy