Re: AD workload [was Re: NomCom 2019 Call for Community Feedback]

"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Wed, 06 November 2019 20:41 UTC

Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.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 7AF2D1200FE for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 12:41:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, 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=akamai.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 3iVUUcqqkFeX for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 12:41:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com [67.231.157.127]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C20D31200F4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 12:41:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0050096.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050096.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id xA6KanUL016564; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 20:40:50 GMT
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=FJ1FbaNn95mahNKTBLjmpXu4rTOmbuUpXLQ8GFWmaBw=; b=es0XB749iYbyn1a8Z/tRcwgrWt8ZnrnKpYPEh6KHtWhxtxj30pL2Su+hOUwojmFau9h7 eghdReFoN7+e4pcIN19ovw5Tdw8Oazstof/wnXvrFjNKXFTrGe4mM4wC8ODKWlcv3DqV hq+4PS7PTOiaiHkmQ0PZzRLG6yCrICrwOV6sETWkYsW9OaxszttTGWYgExlvpD9JoKtL q4AN5B8RDKrzS9q12fKQUTx0+R9QT1d/gJaagPEry0MjRZ43Ty6cQQRrjZGN+ONpEuhu Z0Oj2qg9hzDbuywf909gbLWSWwHWwe9h0njJk5z/fzbO2qyXwKrHt471z1mTjb8+AKT6 vA==
Received: from prod-mail-ppoint5 (prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com [184.51.33.60] (may be forged)) by m0050096.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 2w41v4rv67-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 06 Nov 2019 20:40:50 +0000
Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id xA6KWhF6010443; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 12:40:50 -0800
Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.30]) by prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com with ESMTP id 2w420vrejf-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 06 Nov 2019 12:40:49 -0800
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB5.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.105) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 15:40:49 -0500
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB3.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.103) by usma1ex-dag1mb5.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.105) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1473.3; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 15:40:49 -0500
Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB3.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.103]) by usma1ex-dag1mb3.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.103]) with mapi id 15.00.1473.005; Wed, 6 Nov 2019 15:40:48 -0500
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: Leif Johansson <leifj@mnt.se>
CC: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: AD workload [was Re: NomCom 2019 Call for Community Feedback]
Thread-Topic: AD workload [was Re: NomCom 2019 Call for Community Feedback]
Thread-Index: AQHVlCwgx2FNRIWjFUeNXgzfbQQDx6d9vbCAgAAMugD//62xgIAApcgAgAAF7ACAAMs3AP//rZIA
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2019 20:40:48 +0000
Message-ID: <6D2AB0B4-136D-4569-BF3C-393F11357AA8@akamai.com>
References: <A26D95A5-C70D-496F-97EF-33B0FC322910@akamai.com> <08BB6995-6AD0-4918-A1A4-C9C7819F0B24@mnt.se>
In-Reply-To: <08BB6995-6AD0-4918-A1A4-C9C7819F0B24@mnt.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/10.1f.0.191103
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [172.19.34.165]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <2CDBCE86EAADA144BFC28DE3E8A08B4B@akamai.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-11-06_07:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=566 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1910280000 definitions=main-1911060202
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.95,18.0.572 definitions=2019-11-06_07:2019-11-06,2019-11-06 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 clxscore=1015 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxlogscore=622 bulkscore=0 malwarescore=0 priorityscore=1501 impostorscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-1910280000 definitions=main-1911060203
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/SsFugqiOz2Nv3C21FQLYg1Vr63g>
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, 06 Nov 2019 20:41:55 -0000

    >>   openid foundation comes to mind
    > 
    > I wonder how many members they have?  https://openid.net/foundation/benefits-members/  Again, a serious question.
>     Whats a member and how many does the IETF have and how is that metric related to (say) the impact of an SDO? 

Do you always answer a question with a question? :)

Comparing sizes might show some interesting things.  For example, if an SDO is dominated by three big companies and everyone else is there just to get early access and do rubber-stamping, that doesn't fit the IETF model very well.