Re: IETF 107 Standard Registration and Internet Draft Deadline Approaching

[Alexandre Petrescu <[e-mail]>]

Le 06/03/2020 à 14:40, Phillip Hallam-Baker a écrit :
> 
> 
> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 8:30 PM Alissa Cooper <[e-mail] 
> <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> 
> One thing that becomes obvious while serving in the IETF leadership 
> is that no-win situations are unavoidable. If you try to make 
> decisions based on objective criteria and take your time to gather 
> data, you get criticized. If you try to make decisions based on 
> anecdotal evidence or take what seems to be the path of least 
> resistance, you get criticized. If you follow the advice of one
> group of participants, you get criticized by a different group that 
> disagrees. It can seem like an endless, thankless torrent of
> messages telling you that no matter what you do, it’s wrong and it
> isn’t good enough.
> 
> So I’d like to say thank you to everyone on the IESG, Colin, Jay, 
> Greg, the team at AMS, and the WG and RG chairs for all they’ve done
>  thus far to help manage the IETF 107 meeting planning in light of 
> COVID-19.. Your work is appreciated.
> 
> Alissa
> 
> 
> Quite, this is not a decision you should be taking. It is a decision 
> the government should have taken. Cancelling IETF is not going to 
> have a significant impact on the spread of COVID, it only makes
> sense if there is government leadership and we don't have that.
> 
> China did the math: 2% of 1 billion people is 20 million. If this 
> thing takes hold, it is going to kill more people than WWII.
> 
> At the moment everyone is focused on Vancouver. But we are almost 
> certain to see most sporting events including the Olympics cancelled 
> and at least one of the US political conventions. I would start 
> looking at contingency plans for the case we are told that 108 and 
> 109 are cancelled by government order.
> 
> The impact of government travel restrictions is going to be 
> significant. But that is not going to be the only effect of this 
> crisis. There is going to be a desperate need for technology that 
> allows people to communicate and work remotely.

I agree.  That is a big need right now.

There is also a need of electronic voting systems for those who need to
vote soon.

> And we are the people who are supposed to provide the open,
> interoperable solutions.

I agree.

Openness and way of working can also be used as a good example.

For example, I am still waiting for my humble request since 2 days to
access GISAID database to see what looks like a digital form of this
virus, because I optimistically imagine open access to data might help
someone unthought of up to know to calculate some solution to the problem.

Alex

> 
> Skype, Zoom, WebEx, Keybase, Signal etc. are all fine for 
> collaboration inside enterprises. But none of them is a replacement 
> for email or the telephone because none of them can talk to each 
> other. We need a federated, open solution. And the IETF is the place 
> people are going to be looking to develop that.
>