Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs
Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Thu, 20 September 2018 14:37 UTC
Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
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 ED914130E0C for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 07:37:29 -0700 (PDT)
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, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnot.net header.b=BNYgo3mw; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=OhM8VTMG
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 5-JeZjIAJDzV for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 07:37:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C03A130DCC for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 07:37:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6EE4721EA7; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 10:37:23 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 20 Sep 2018 10:37:23 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=8HauD8js7HwK+IGda3o7tirSVK1ZE dD3XQ7VyzU60Rg=; b=BNYgo3mwfGqQqu6/hy03J2DvouK7XX1+UURxoG1QAnpmo GtrEPgkJozcr5JJc5pBO0OAUUP0hDb3YENYlOOEYevZA75IVfELrt3ZbN1NG4NgW 4+cnM8iSU+CSdru3jXp6d08h95UUmtis0karcKmmkQMd2+WdTlwWvDD0esjlpKE7 CZp3MCKFsJd70n2uk2zZf21i2TyispI7b1LGLu+kHgt4x8eMHjm/qkTEo1P2g+ys gkO6lhWsjnD3ITZpBzO5frNBXoWpURspYcxqicfY+he+TT4Pp+W8FfqHOo5Uuufl Bq0GeITUBh5TAHCzZEmeI31IreizmNAo91SlBDB6g==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=8HauD8 js7HwK+IGda3o7tirSVK1ZEdD3XQ7VyzU60Rg=; b=OhM8VTMGZk1IVQ3OFnfx6X strl3J59TZMgyoEpH4+Yaj6RqklFQKp5IxhDMT0geXHRDyu886AZxQTI7dWPspj4 lFC7m9yUvce93o6CBrSUlqpzDA0/oNuc8TZBTK3mkmnATWnE4ps4/HOhvKP+TtMk 7AT4xC+1L23ews1KxxP80iaSFptVngYuZW5+YvaWHO0x7l1OuJreSmwZDGBxSbav FDWzhpKvE8dbwLxgtX3ix89+VMfS7x6GVsQaoO6onQ10GE5mXOfNsDIo4UzOfG8/ YxBpplXnpPr4dmOJnYjvZFDUcyd4EQWr5xsEUUS7rA1uy7FefVQBK5LPf6knFcNA ==
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:obCjW9sp0Zh6_KywuN45c1fcrB1QNa4_RP0fGED-Jvs3_u6h9eL40Q> <xmx:obCjWw6iJkbXTYxGChlVl20a1bfJiamt5ESroaMXG_Y8YRJwRDEPlg> <xmx:orCjW4QSXm8iMoHAjGbSBzL1FGnFTRHtRdsspf9DIXd4M2rps-CoPA> <xmx:orCjW7ubUPYKGw70TDuurLTiaQZgANIO6LdNoEzXm4p4VD8w2KJsvg> <xmx:orCjWy_wDWyL_UkFvOfRw_q-duhyXFnQ5o9FUi6sPjCyZJNkXx2Urw> <xmx:o7CjW5oOd0WwwSuXOryibVhPYquaRB2AolHesUkoXgaECsNxz5N07w>
X-ME-Sender: <xms:obCjWyK3srTS0wJlgG3AL9xOitPYfkKa2WmSA4O7mxT9W_28AodKGg>
Received: from [10.26.179.47] (nat-216-240-30-23.netapp.com [216.240.30.23]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 64B23102E4; Thu, 20 Sep 2018 10:37:21 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
Subject: Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <cafa1282-ae6a-93de-ea4a-d100af28d8b8@digitaldissidents.org>
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2018 10:37:19 -0400
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <A96C9C94-AFF6-4EDF-9E19-26BADCD8B396@mnot.net>
References: <cafa1282-ae6a-93de-ea4a-d100af28d8b8@digitaldissidents.org>
To: Niels ten Oever <lists@digitaldissidents.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/YhYSvT9wRVoKZ4QWDZMBLX9wDyc>
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: Thu, 20 Sep 2018 14:37:30 -0000
Hi Niels, As my wife so often tells our kids, "manners cost nothing." Considering that the RFC series is archival and therefore our words will live for a long time, it's also prudent to be careful with our words. Consider how casual racism and sexism from even twenty years ago is perceived now. So I think that this should be highlighted on the shepherd's checklist <https://www.ietf.org/iesg/template/doc-writeup-essay-style.html> -- e.g., "Is the terminology used in the draft unnecessarily specific to one culture, or potentially offensive?". The RFC Editor might also want to make these considerations part of their process, in consultation with the stream managers. Cheers, > On 20 Sep 2018, at 5:25 am, Niels ten Oever <lists@digitaldissidents.org> wrote: > > Hi all, > > On the hrpc-list [0] there has been an intense conversation which was > spurred by the news that the Python community removed Master/Slave > terminology from its programming language [1]. > > In the discussion that followed it was remarked that in RFCs terms like > Master/Slave, blacklist/whitelist, man-in-middle, and other terminology > that is offensive to some people and groups is quite common. > > This is not a discussion that can be resolved in hrpc, but rather should > be dealt with in the IETF community (because hrpc doesn't make policy > for terminology in the IETF), which is why I am posting this here. > > If people find the discussion worthwhile, we might also be just in time > to request a BoF on this topic. > > Looking forward to discuss. > > Best, > > Niels > > > [0] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/hrpc/ > [1] > https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/8x7akv/masterslave-terminology-was-removed-from-python-programming-language > > > -- > Niels ten Oever > Researcher and PhD Candidate > Datactive Research Group > University of Amsterdam > > PGP fingerprint 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488 > 643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3 > -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/
- Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Niels ten Oever
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Riccardo Bernardini
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Stewart Bryant
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Petr Špaček
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Niels ten Oever
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Dave Cridland
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Loa Andersson
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Mukund Sivaraman
- SV: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Anne-Marie Eklund-Löwinder
- RE: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Roberta Maglione (robmgl)
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Ole Troan
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Michal Krsek
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Tony Finch
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Job Snijders
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Anton Ivanov
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Anton Ivanov
- RE: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Adrian Farrel
- Re: SV: Diversity and offensive terminology in RF… Jaap Akkerhuis
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Toerless Eckert
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Andrew Sullivan
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Kathleen Moriarty
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs lloyd.wood
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Carsten Bormann
- Re: SV: Diversity and offensive terminology in RF… lloyd.wood
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Paul Wouters
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Paul Wouters
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs lloyd.wood
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Toerless Eckert
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Stephan Wenger
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Mark Nottingham
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Stephen Farrell
- RE: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs John E Drake
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Melinda Shore
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Dick Franks
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs ned+ietf
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Toerless Eckert
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Melinda Shore
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Melinda Shore
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Paul Hoffman
- Re: SV: Diversity and offensive terminology in RF… Evan Hunt
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Toerless Eckert
- ""Man-in-the-middle""? <was, Re: SV: Diversity an… Charlie Perkins
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Evan Hunt
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Melinda Shore
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Evan Hunt
- Re: SV: Diversity and offensive terminology in RF… Michael StJohns
- Re: ""Man-in-the-middle""? <was, Re: SV: Diversit… Dave Aronson
- Re: SV: Diversity and offensive terminology in RF… Heather Flanagan
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Mark Nottingham
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Heather Flanagan
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Evan Hunt
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Carsten Bormann
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Ted Lemon
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Toerless Eckert
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Evan Hunt
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Carsten Bormann
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs John C Klensin
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Carsten Bormann
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Toerless Eckert
- Re: SV: Diversity and offensive terminology in RF… Anton Ivanov
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Yoav Nir
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Kyle Rose
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Carsten Bormann
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Dave Cridland
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Ted Lemon
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… John Levine
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Toerless Eckert
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Ted Lemon
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Mark Rousell
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Mark Rousell
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Melinda Shore
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Alia Atlas
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Allison Mankin
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Mark Rousell
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Mark Rousell
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Mark Rousell
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Lloyd Wood
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Lloyd Wood
- On-path attackers (Was: Re: Diversity and offensi… Jari Arkko
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Eliot Lear
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Niels ten Oever
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Lloyd Wood
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Eliot Lear
- Re: On-path attackers (Was: Re: Diversity and off… Kathleen Moriarty
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Alissa Cooper
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Paul Wouters
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Ted Lemon
- Re: On-path attackers (Was: Re: Diversity and off… Donald Eastlake
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Lloyd Wood
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Niels ten Oever
- Re: On-path attackers (Was: Re: Diversity and off… Toerless Eckert
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Ted Lemon
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Anton Ivanov
- Re: On-path attackers (Was: Re: Diversity and off… Ted Lemon
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… John R Levine
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Paul Wouters
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Eliot Lear
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Toerless Eckert
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Nico Williams
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Avri
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Dave Cridland
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… John Levine
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Allison Mankin
- Tell me if I should send this Re: why exactly is … Mallory Knodel
- Mallory-in-the-middle attacks (Re: SV: Diversity … Nico Williams
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Nico Williams
- Re: On-path attackers (Was: Re: Diversity and off… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Glenn Deen
- Re: Mallory-in-the-middle attacks (Re: SV: Divers… Nico Williams
- Re: Tell me if I should send this Re: why exactly… lloyd.wood
- Re: Mallory-in-the-middle attacks (Re: SV: Divers… Mallory Knodel
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Mallory Knodel
- Re: Diversity and offensive terminology in RFCs Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… S Moonesamy
- Re: why exactly is HRPC for, was Diversity and of… Mallory Knodel