IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Describing which behavior is appropriate or not (was: Last Call: <draft-eggert-bcp45bis-06.txt> (IETF Discussion List Charter) to Best Current Practice)

Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl> Sun, 31 October 2021 00:52 UTC

Return-Path: <sander@steffann.nl>
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 01A0F3A158C for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 30 Oct 2021 17:52:07 -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, 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 (1024-bit key) header.d=steffann.nl
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 GN5rrDO1O4Pv for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 30 Oct 2021 17:52:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.sintact.nl (mail.sintact.nl [IPv6:2a00:8642:1000:1::22]) (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 E4C253A158E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sat, 30 Oct 2021 17:52:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6892D4B; Sun, 31 Oct 2021 02:51:57 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=steffann.nl; h= x-mailer:references:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:date :date:in-reply-to:from:from:subject:subject:mime-version :content-type:content-type:received:received; s=mail; t= 1635641514; bh=bHYGY/WKpHaDassmxauMU5NOyU7FAe7xZIRf4e45fok=; b=M 3IeCzyFOpon+9/vxL2/K1vfGNMhDbgvctmBo44TdCEfQ/AaCaW8uXeTsF0rhh8IO +mrrqkN1g6IJ0yCd7xCSR6wLe41een2zZMaTa3d64RJmnBks0UTlr4Uu4sxp+BPI 1AvS96Uub9Fg46FCVu59gMjQBo7ULMqm62Bz/UrERo=
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.sintact.nl
Received: from mail.sintact.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.sintact.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id uH5hVSIhS4NW; Sun, 31 Oct 2021 02:51:54 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2001:9e0:8804:7701:94ba:9106:11d0:1935]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mail.sintact.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CDD764A; Sun, 31 Oct 2021 02:51:54 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.20.0.1.32\))
Subject: Re: Describing which behavior is appropriate or not (was: Last Call: <draft-eggert-bcp45bis-06.txt> (IETF Discussion List Charter) to Best Current Practice)
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
From: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
In-Reply-To: <faa808cd-ad75-f643-7f44-62af5f0dbab3@network-heretics.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2021 02:51:54 +0200
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <47E5B329-0002-45C6-905F-B91E1B6B86EF@steffann.nl>
References: <47db1859-8201-9f37-0efd-aa09f4b1379b@network-heretics.com> <98F25285-BD71-49BB-9B7E-CEFF217183F7@yahoo.co.uk> <faa808cd-ad75-f643-7f44-62af5f0dbab3@network-heretics.com>
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3693.20.0.1.32)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/iWJSZpLJgVE7-vNC96Du0aZybGk>
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, 31 Oct 2021 00:52:07 -0000

Hi,

> And that's why it's important to reinforce the idea that IETF participants are NOT representatives of their employers, but at most "sponsored" by them (or in many cases they pay their own way), and IETF participants are expected to use their own best technical judgment about what's good for the Internet as a whole.

If we can get back to this, I'm in!

Unfortunately the IETF has indeed become the IVTF (https://archive.psg.com/051000.sigcomm-ivtf.pdf)

Cheers,
Sander

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email