Re: United Nations report on Internet standards

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Fri, 27 March 2020 20:19 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.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 BD0713A0BDC for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 13:19:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, 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=gmail.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 WjRXXVz0ZOWq for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 13:19:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pj1-x1034.google.com (mail-pj1-x1034.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1034]) (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 6DC183A0BDE for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 13:19:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pj1-x1034.google.com with SMTP id jz1so4641977pjb.0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 13:19:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=kmzT1rawz8LwicPfL4xmorjgMTcZS0wN34LmyenDr6Y=; b=kPtMWJqe/2PJOBjfN6tBoFz70U2jwFIWzSieS7UQdpZcM3k3ker7/OedeBWVGdPVzc 5uHPDBJCuGzG3xJs59wbTWdbq30vqzz72Uu/f/m/ca1C+yChbDgJ0116NN9aA777VoD4 YzIeDbrHrKkW6l8jk0bCwtyEtGRwnk6+8Eq09e0ZvfSE3FfLMcCf7nwxSplHKlvCgris 3EchJM1/qn6s2ehDuTZQFGYcfl443uoTYXdGrgsjzcOgvBMDNPRD1yxmtZd1eFh//pEr AgQZN28Jk6DTUrA0hk9OVmUZI/BP5SyeU12Knimm5heQ6khkBliXhxI6ogl/MewrE1QR a/bw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=kmzT1rawz8LwicPfL4xmorjgMTcZS0wN34LmyenDr6Y=; b=ClpqRiF2unVYp/TkAJ4w/YebTNbyLapXyM6NPfTJK50OeRRXIW+VpWRpINNr6L+eBI 70xYzyqXfxkvveIJ1G6FaHFe8c4bRu/DjLKGu3zH2hOAKC6d0uFmBXru9u2ENzi8eAnu kGVwRSgncI737fcr1+z1PM83KjDvj3MAdhHQqkyZYo4ap2KmvuJqnGQDZPsufjiD+2Ms HzDGvv4fjgwgMGaXP7AHlPFgcjHNU1Ho/O9cYMO1Dz3AQEt03kO8wexeRnINHIN2xcuS rjGNJSgnk3kqaj97LJzWRVoAzDZCSM18A0ZLPZ3RSj7MgD3ib51tPA31cJb2NVeH6BX7 4+FA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ANhLgQ3OWRVERGbyvUXqH1C7qaze30QIDx018ECwAUtJsOFNIw05P4hP 9uiMXrwriyolwQveQDU9Sms=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADFU+vsJUi6DM+xnEcM7idsVZp2o3A6ja5ssauePbMbQ5VbMaP4AhWqZ5W2/9hMBm/Otw4KocFvnnA==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:7445:: with SMTP id e5mr765665plt.308.1585340343609; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 13:19:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.30] ([165.84.25.143]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g10sm4873211pfk.90.2020.03.27.13.19.01 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 27 Mar 2020 13:19:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: United Nations report on Internet standards
To: Stephane Bortzmeyer <bortzmeyer@nic.fr>, Vittorio Bertola <vittorio.bertola=40open-xchange.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
References: <255650568.54634.1584372553034@appsuite-gw2.open-xchange.com> <20200327072621.GA14620@sources.org>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b1dca4db-8626-fa6f-1544-c62e9bb56e16@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2020 09:18:59 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20200327072621.GA14620@sources.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/aC2XycBZ3VSj-EgU7c7x9JjkGQU>
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: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 20:19:06 -0000

On 27-Mar-20 20:26, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 04:29:12PM +0100,
>  Vittorio Bertola <vittorio.bertola=40open-xchange.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote 
>  a message of 93 lines which said:
> 
>> I am not sure of which IETF list is appropriate for this. It
>> concerns relationships with non-technical stakeholders and their
>> representation in the standards-making process,

The singularity of the IETF is that there is no "representation"
since all participants contribute as individuals. This is something
that I guarantee we have been trying to convey to government and
international officials since 1994 to my personal knowledge and
probably longer. While I was IAB chair (1995-2000) I spent quite a
lot of time doing that, since liaisons are an IAB responsibility.

Such officials have genuine difficulty in understanding this concept,
until they actually attend a few meetings.
 
> Well, it is mostly about what happens after (deployment of
> standards, not definition of standards). As such, it has very few
> requests specifically for IETF. Except:
> 
>> It formulates (section 8.1) six recommendations, of which the sixth
>> is specifically aimed at the IETF and other Internet standards
>> organizations:
> 
>> "Standardisation processes are advised to include a consultation
>> phase with government and industry policy makers, and civil society
>> experts."

I've always understood that's what ISOC is for, and I've sat in
policy meetings with an ISOC accreditation in seats reserved for
"Civil Society".

> As noted by several people here, the governements don't ask for a
> voice (they already have it) but for a power of decision. One can
> imagine what would have happened of RFC 1984 in such "consultation".
> 
>> There is also a page (section 7.13) discussing "Communication
>> from/to the IETF", and how to make it better.
> 
> From my experience, communicating with governements is very
> frustrating: they don't listen and they hate being challenged ("if you
> don't want to add backdoors, it means you support terrorism and,
> worse, illegal file-sharing".)

Exactly, but in fairness the NSA did send somebody to the IETF during
the pre-RFC1984 discussion. However, in general, officials are completely
flummoxed by the IETF notion of participation that is not representation.
As in "We don't care what the NSA thinks about key escrow, we want to hear
your personal technical explanation of how it improves end to end
security."

<snip>

On 28-Mar-20 07:31, Michael Richardson wrote:
...
> internet-clueless boomer with power...
...
> This is a *significant* step forward.  I suspect it is the result
> of above mentioned boomer retirement.

Writing as a mainly retired boomer, I would like to point out
that the Internet was largely built by boomers. I don't think the
problem is so much there as in the arrogance that seems to be built
into civil servants - not because they are personally arrogant, but
because the civil service itself is intrinsically arrogant, knows best,
etc. So it's great if the next cohort of officials groks the Internet,
but that doesn't mean that they grok the IETF or will ever accept
RFC 1984, 2804 and 7258.

Stay well,
   Brian