Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should the IETF respond?

Warren Kumari <> Fri, 27 January 2017 19:41 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78D0E129858 for <>; Fri, 27 Jan 2017 11:41:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5F4kJjdCufMl for <>; Fri, 27 Jan 2017 11:41:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3E08129857 for <>; Fri, 27 Jan 2017 11:41:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id k15so152587814qtg.3 for <>; Fri, 27 Jan 2017 11:41:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=/3YsHGtT1N8Pvz5gP2XMVQ3h2y+4jcInqQ6fHbU9GRc=; b=02P4EQjAXLg6m7DbzhnBMmpX5r5s6IhZJdRzVCa5m95oddMGlTuXX3caLsY8D4uLwK 3wcNSkVflcZ0K6jbVby1RUyjO5bQ5NTtqhwrihYaEmGwyyIEibkAYVEmgLXHmLCXX6xN Vay1/BWOsAjxbFeJvdlGKZFEUKKjiaRikss7K4ix+/z0Ya8T2I7pman/jmGjp4ksT2/q tzTSn3vEVapGBpB+jDnVYwPpsukCgPAsrx6GYv+/0RD34H2HjTcXD6RnSFv1j3oPXjXd bjTmYE8gsfIOSV2KoR7jZOcJ849A+ywhBrU1gFC63OgbHNEs5Kf2H5tFt13T7N3tEGos UmJw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=/3YsHGtT1N8Pvz5gP2XMVQ3h2y+4jcInqQ6fHbU9GRc=; b=DvgoeLRZ4HSh+vM4qyrZuGxn3mgm6ST01NL1bjxQRk65tff8mPOwMPaedpks4gZrDp vcRYYEJBjWrz1KG+E7P+Q9zSn3ZE1NaFYOezo5jWoMC1mG4CSIdaq4VByLdIbtbDUvkh evaXjn72QcuCt1L9Y1au6QKqno+vdgAnsy3fjtUrDFq4afgVz+XIm3uoJY17OtrZXH7F EyZahO3U3c6jf2v1g2HiURWzuXBlvJQ5MYENOtPC70L1zOQRVBF3uOmPcojiJgYVRXQr PSPQPMgsFq7HjxCeFcZEuJMpexXbZ1/a7b9QrZKkh+5CipIKXQrIaW8IHV8f3VuPo2vQ nHvA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKJfTqe4Ej9OkS31c8Sr/znrxh7VK7HE1DMLWy+ggTlcVMvvubJBz4tX1x9sWDlskP5NRO3R5zcsBTbQVXf
X-Received: by with SMTP id n124mr10046664qkf.235.1485546087710; Fri, 27 Jan 2017 11:41:27 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with HTTP; Fri, 27 Jan 2017 11:40:57 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
From: Warren Kumari <>
Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 14:40:57 -0500
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: If Muslims are blocked by the U.S., should the IETF respond?
To: Dave Burstein <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Archived-At: <>
Cc: " Disgust" <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 19:41:30 -0000

If only we had some sort of a list or working group where things like
meeting venues could be discussed.


On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 2:29 PM, Dave Burstein <> wrote:
> Folks
> The IETF has generally steered clear of political entanglements, which I
> think wise. Nonetheless, I raise the question of whether we should respond
> to the proposed U.S. ban on nationals of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan,
> Syria, Yemen.
> Scott Aaronson reports one of his MIT students will probably have to leave
> if he can't get his visa removed. We all know how many Iranians are
> world-class technologists, including in computer science and electrical
> engineering.
> I hope many from outside the United States speak up. The issues around Trump
> make it hard to be objective here.
> Should we take a stand?
> If so, should it be symbolic or substantive?
> Symbolic actions could include:
> A resolution
> Establishing remote hubs for our meetings in Iran and one of the Arabic
> speaking countries. ISOC has funded remote hubs.
> Outreach in Farsi and Arabic to show that whatever actions the government
> takes, the IETF welcomes participation. This could be as simple as Jari
> Arkko writing a letter to the editor of the leading newspapers with an
> invitation for all to join our work.
> Some might also think that we should move the July 2018 meeting from San
> Francisco to a location accessible to more of our members, perhaps to Mexico
> or Canada.
> ------------
> As we discuss this, I urge everyone to avoid distracting comments about U.S.
> politics. We're not going to change many minds here pro or con the new U.S.
> President.
> Instead, let's keep the discussion here to how we should respond to a major
> nation refusing visas to so many of our members.
> Dave Burstein
> --
> Editor, Fast Net News, 5GW News, Net Policy News and DSL Prime
> Author with Jennie Bourne  DSL (Wiley) and Web Video: Making It Great,
> Getting It Noticed (Peachpit)

I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
idea in the first place.
This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
of pants.