Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? (was: New-comers)

"lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk" <lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk> Sun, 18 April 2021 12:14 UTC

Return-Path: <lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk>
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 4B46E3A1514 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 05:14:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=yahoo.co.uk
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 B4p0cSEIvQ00 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 05:14:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from sonic310-57.consmr.mail.ir2.yahoo.com (sonic310-57.consmr.mail.ir2.yahoo.com [77.238.177.30]) (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 4C43A3A1511 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 05:14:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.co.uk; s=s2048; t=1618748079; bh=s8Rs3CN1ja7GzR6Cf7CjB/MjAdZvfEGU1uK24q4092A=; h=Date:From:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:From:Subject:Reply-To; b=WEIImFNGU8tWYSKz4RztTLdAFvuM2ZKcgPeiBgH2+fqDPWblq2yTk6hXhkxYfvR0hum4DbuiSfeh3ToaNFjGlFSJDrBRlubwUooFY4lKoK/wltTkxSkWyP9O0fqifr1OP5ASREe9dzt+Vo0fMJJ1pSSEGnPK5YxjciBrtC7y5TIQMz+UZz/NFr5Re8tL1UgqZtHbuWYbJAOpj9pnqj7VesjBbvCihx1g2LC0XyMFR1r9TqXIbxBf9SWygu5M/4MDO9TH9xyrOP5WP1RDij7QqGyudMXy5CFT9JLB0TnayZM+lFuCN/XpQ85Wq9axoOiv7ZgO45JL366V8pw/EFBo1Q==
X-SONIC-DKIM-SIGN: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s2048; t=1618748079; bh=RL0FTieAhwUOUqbWWyk34mbfugP/p3zwzNgzSvZYQ+I=; h=X-Sonic-MF:Date:From:To:Subject:From:Subject; b=UKN4qohJ/bYLLRjh7QKbNkuoDuSq3lQ/KL2P3Da0vLn7ZdKcK/yCAZckfuent/9SFqB33s+WR3j/j2Imdp6ZwWBpd6/ei9iSZDfCvBtUBig8LnhVE1uDG5kRQWonlT3qFn4ad3WaRs/xERpJ5VWOG6tfeo0yvkmqYfJSb178znzv185vRjDEY3fRfzU110L7sbIqzPndY8uDH/zSqZ1lMNX2eWNil98QkrILUvJH3kaVyWNWcRN4f6VE4Fd1UypQ50WabgAd592jNRwR+C5zb0zPtNEtUFCOOWh4t91pzD+70UBlBALKHiDkW+HuYdlTIubF4l3a4O/9Hh4cMzZJvw==
X-YMail-OSG: kWrs2HQVM1nZpNXlb4Ow6HXiju7Bv0L_HFjGAiOyW9RH5qlwSsbKYKRt7E8bgBh X9Z5m9dIYxj1lBytYD_dp3xLQJKgUjU98jHUo68T1NqKKFMdugk8sdA4pPmGJihtYuwpK8srhLaA Uovoc_UWEjHPmnYMcJ3CQFMvPD3PUZuuollRK._OFGCxZKoDp3FLG4hBim.Z_GIDNxTrL38AOuwO rsz5y909i_sLnmahAf_ThpgiT5ze2fzSZbelRvnMyXRh3HhNdrvt9gPJW55m6nNnnvjXR5bcHLN3 0wO3UrkKV.d4CrxXmqa8.Ey12R.V6yLX6gkK27FV.hpiz9qnR_K4OPFExVuMNzhsUVL3OEM5tHHu gOrTFU0S2a_iXRe3vKqSYvtEAk0BGiFX3TpW7xwpTfUOdhiLmRa3sDI8uGzM8.jAItvbOE5VZT5E fUtleJ909nx2ht1F5fbe5JL5wPL50BLNbe4wEbz.vDCeonTsLRVmt90iCqCK1hAiRhprB23vdVZw etiuQC9tt3OWxLAGxq6YCkNsr.MlU7sBkAOTzm6NDFLqqooBKngNoXP4Ksv_mN5osit0U6y38xJO BQnIBKAs6.8cY3YA7OVyjDnnVDLFwZqNnWL4O8TUU_nRS8ZoHsGr2QcINjIZVmI5vtkSkOycn3Kl QZlDpCF5wtKsxLz9afaS72rD.fLV5P0rBokae.aLaYfAvbMfHG87XNFrNvcG2eqFF2ueAfQgcu00 XuQmcbYyINmr1M_0DZPJhCNR_AoYAl62c_NfujOk4y5cR7Ks67_WaGNitR1cY0HZmSA2kLoK7Hwy c2KBBRmvq_JRJL9kYBeZq4q9GmEJzyEpjHYKv40q2UkDx.AtDP0H7BX9Jb5bhJcCf13kOfhD2Eeg .4GdkplB3OONcOnugaDLHAgTYQ9szCkaRxmmzQNhxkYUitxaYhX2jpook9BeNUO8B0JfqrNfdNVj c.TmQBDOTYBwgJ05PUBeEOD7_gdvw2ZQs08Num7rIaO.zW5Vyyspdvh5KMuG8ptEdOQ8M26u1l0Q _L35NuqT3eQUjJ2maleV0ee6XnwKK2KEDkzkOLk6JcavCYSpkyMUTu6cdit0eo9UwwXZrRHAc7BP j3BLO1dfF6e8PPb_ynfmtm.rMy7ATPBwovcWNJXzIqZIypejV5I7AxIbz3PyxeManeG7VynIfWLH PWvzBoN67ypQzeGumhm0OdAt2PCETt1LbdXTUCrfvTWq4mzTz7eIY0z75LJkPMFs_jnxiSUQtIxv USR4PQRXlOfk_6jqXNGi1OcuVVXcQY.TI.Sm.ztRX53mX6oOr.DaFStzKCaEeG9B07zhwx2A_iVS GF7559DXuAHHR6ZrIuOHfV9LNR2sLw8Wi_JvNEpgtlbM2sYQmbUCZ4aX4Xc3CTYdUCho_Q2ibkNq KZUieqAfz14kZ5QtLZ0296HfW3nq4BiPLHYXuFkE1Bywn46u35gj4rZkSAQ7ZAchvHW07JbuT4ti TJi4zGNHlNhgIrIPyudperGsUUsX18qxWfx9nrroasgEoQlAK3rhbvYSfJQGek53GFgyvopeYdZG xgx2qQqAO57u16y9klVGfdJ7mT5BPC24Z_3ooOsCJ6C0ZYatgMUV4GZieq5joYKtaKrh5kfDwBM6 CXhcSP4KI8RaudCCEwJ_EJtrtqAAdvNiSz__I06i526QIZnTe1DDLczn1Qq5CVRyd9pSYEGIgbEw EyiqGz4BYModu2DXgGIJCTJOLkk6bOIqgBrtMyVTAAZ6kcsH8VN9.QrJW61mB9_8AnuzfEpEhe6j yRHiglqUNE9IVs3NLd2ljC9Hd.ZHyuV.ocz0iCIYCzabOg1rMPl1qhrP9irRqcBF96I_z75WdA0E UpQwEzaihtGNkmdSteSH2yt8ss5OWSh336gLI4EOgRKHyAuP3LYEFC5fLk3gXg3MqjL4hMWEx.L0 mjlpdZ8xIlKtEFTq5IXHjzRd56jOTP_ClrNL_5..JwAh_WiWJbu9DGJOthHF.RbNKTo8wfPUUSif BILjV7dXdJbtnS1racy8RuUQzxc6SUktNteTxY6o8dMmDQumC9tpNk8Vb_RJ9IrL9SSVKVZVV6UY vl5GUhu4TiC4bXIsiLcdvgI.eAMe45S6zmLBrs4.CMsWwDvLl5wEcfXWbJ0vEY8o1u64Nlf.Rudf uE03cd8B1Z3SzrcSIlTzo27Dca7rMb67RsG0hqMvaYHxoqNeJ65LPgYkPzgDo2J_n4.XiM8UoGjk NKQZaspXUXjzrdbd0xrVRXtNKrR4yxSGIey5J.EFghw9sjvwivTmlR1Ro0sRRX0qhEQbfPuh1s5I PKzpDurM9xEXFTgCxxZfnUsDFgC6534aKQapA9HENahNAkgnFIO0VF4Pg1DyKUps2UMI.bpeNTT0 KousWKspcj63RqXxzh2b0HoETDoiK1uGc9KGe3HeWKCjmmhKNam9apyB5pm84Ip_LfRxoOFeX4RT Q.GNE1irXgE3kGUwnJTQJgoirLJfF2a02OUJlDTHDGCuhSIS0PlL1B3DelU3W0sYor_RRmsLWHiM Mjj6EKNCSjCIBg2pJUSGqB85f0ukV8mDN3eOH9CGUU2KoMZVFfU8PgOpRm0jIst60aa0pAYWZnec DUPOT4cOn7g--
X-Sonic-MF: <lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk>
Received: from sonic.gate.mail.ne1.yahoo.com by sonic310.consmr.mail.ir2.yahoo.com with HTTP; Sun, 18 Apr 2021 12:14:39 +0000
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2021 12:13:49 +0000 (UTC)
From: "lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk" <lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk>
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>, IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <585949916.765282.1618748029732@mail.yahoo.com>
In-Reply-To: <1084449815.5209238.1618742553057@mail.yahoo.com>
References: <cdaf3837-05f5-a260-d99c-6858eb087d28@network-heretics.com> <C8DF0047-9783-434F-A8E3-80CA27129F14@yahoo.co.uk> <1623472249.5141806.1618728300270@mail.yahoo.com> <649297164.5194905.1618742246097@mail.yahoo.com> <1084449815.5209238.1618742553057@mail.yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: What's the alternative to "snarling"? (was: New-comers)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: WebService/1.1.18121 YMailNorrin Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/90.0.4430.72 Safari/537.36
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/UAakKReQbHt1fiJpZaBxYkbdprs>
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: Sun, 18 Apr 2021 12:14:46 -0000

On 18 Apr 2021, at 11:47, Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com> wrote:
> 
> Perhaps we can define a better way of giving pushback than snarling.
> But I'm pretty sure that we could also do worse than letting people
> express their dislike for ideas in their own words. I'd be especially
> wary of defining some standard "polite" way of rejecting Bad Ideas
> that doesn't let people express themselves.  We need some flexibility
> in how we give pushback, so that some people can open up doors at least
> a little bit, even if other people want to slam them shut.
> 
> Maybe it would help to have some concrete suggestions for non-snarling
> ways of pushing back on Bad Ideas.  As in "if you can't find better
> language to use, try one of these boilerplate alternatives".


That is a truly excellent suggestion.

Your idea would be more clearly expressed in an internet-draft, which we
look forward to seeing in due course. As far as we can tell, your basic
idea is sound. We look forward to seeing it progress in a different
workgroup.

We need to define these alternatives in a BRUSH-OFF BOILERPLATE (BROFF)
workgroup, which we can form by holding a BROFF BOF. The output of that
WG can be an informational RFC making advisory recommendations on how to
effectively handle and respond to bad, poorly thought out, unwelcome,
ill-advised, or ahead-of-their-time ideas.

Of course, BROFF will be presumed to be working on RFC editing markup, so
we'll immediately need to decide a better name at the BROFF BOF; say,
Idea Acknowledgement and Action (IDEATION)?

The informational RFC will specify sample response boilerplates, which
will be something generated using a simple tool based along the lines
of these skeleton choose-your-own-acknowledgement checkboxes in an
outline decision-tree format, below.

This is very much an early draft laying out the basic idea with some
filler, not set in stone, and would need considerable revision during
the BOF and until eventual WG acceptance.


INSTRUCTIONS TO DESIGNATED FIRST RESPONDERS:
   tick boxes that are relevant, and assemble your reply from that.

Dear [INSERT NAME HERE].

thankyou for your suggested idea in [INSERT WORKGROUP HERE].

[] Your idea would be
   [] better
   [] more clearly
   [] more fully
   expressed in
   [] an
   [] a different
   internet draft,
   [] which we look forward to seeing in due course.
   [] which would be suitable for another workgroup.
   [] from other authors.

[] As far as we can tell, your basic idea
   [] which has been said before
      [] many times
         [] by others
         [] by you
   
   [] is sound
      [] but has been evaluated and rejected as not viable
         [] at this time
         [] each and every time
      for [REASONS].
   [] sounds as if it could have been sound, but [REASONS].
   [] needs sounding boards outside this WG. We suggest [ANOTHER SELECTED WORKGROUP].

   [] is unlikely to be progressed, because
      [] it is not within the scope of this workgroup
         [] but it is in scope for [ANOTHER SELECTED WORKGROUP].
      [] while it is in the scope of this workgroup, it is not in its charter.
      [] it is in the scope and charter of this workgroup, but alongside already established work, which is
         [] taking all our time and effort.
         [] sucking all the air out of the room.
         [] supported and invested in by almost everyone else.
      [] [REASONS]

      [] that problem just can't be fixed.
         [] Everyone else has already tried.
      [] it's a new transport protocol. Space for those is exhausted.
          [] There's the QUIC and the dead, so this must already be dead.
          [] and its congestion control would need work.
      [] it requires a 'flag day' changing everything on the Internet.
      [] it requires a 'flag day' changing the known laws of physics.
      [] it requires a 'flag day' changing capitalism.
      [] it, without explanation,
         [] invokes and relies on the availability and use of
            [] blockchain
            [] NFTs
            [] 'the cloud'
            [] quantum entanglement
            [] the 'quantum blockchain cloud'
            [] IPv6.
         [] uses unfamiliar terminology.
            [] including 'quantum blockchain cloud'.
         [] uses familiar terminology, but not in a way that that terminology is used.
         [] invents an entirely new language for networking.

     [] it increments the version number of an existing protocol without justification.
     [] it decrements the version number of an existing protocol without justification.
     [] it does not consider the end-to-end principle.
     [] it relies on the end-to-end-principle, which fell out of favor over a decade ago.
     [] it does not consider the RESTful architecture.
     [] it relies on the RESTful architecture, which fell out of fashion a decade ago.
     [] it expects multicast use to work.
     [] it expects IPv6 use to work.
     [] it raises important security concerns, which are
        [] obvious
        [] non-obvious
           [] but require too much explanation
        [] sadly not interesting enough to describe in detail.
     [] it expects us to work for, rather than with, you.

[] With much more added explanatory detail, your idea
   [] may meet with a better reception.
   [] may not meet with any improved reception.
   [] will have much more added explanatory detail.

We thank you for taking the time to present your idea to us and to make a contribution.

Your efforts and enthusiasm have
   [] unfortunately 
not gone unnoticed.

We look forward to
   [] more considered
   [] better documented
   [] more aligned-with-reality-as-we-see-it
   [] more politically acceptable
   [] improved
future ideas from you
   [] and to seeing those ideas progress in [ANOTHER SELECTED WORKGROUP].