Re: "community" for the RFC series

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Fri, 04 October 2019 22:07 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 34ED1120020 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 15:07:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 vgzXaJQM2C1A for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 15:07:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pf1-x442.google.com (mail-pf1-x442.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::442]) (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 472B512004A for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 15:07:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pf1-x442.google.com with SMTP id q10so4745895pfl.0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 04 Oct 2019 15:07:31 -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=XyLbWcC8hEeC/niTBawD6XysBNfZLUcAcSjr5gVm3+8=; b=r6NCF2czYXUBWrcBOaflaFXTAvAd/dFNi+XBYpe0Vo2ubNEbAHo8jEj494WG7uoJC7 3o0TCyQeHDoJz5ikVElMjut2T06l8fxdm34ZD/Mg0APZV3YOMNxZ8x/VFQPDPJmjPeYx HbDjvP7jQSeX3yzSTRicvKm8BbReoB2EzdRaT68UQRq7KYAMejZteclfbsd0iZW0C/+9 uvcow56kF9sP4OlBgCErDbH/s1Prq5iIN2xBEkYndiQD+HT7z2v0DyBLr1yEebdxFkrp bvef2QXtlfSJLTUTQ06C1JB1bzTizv+POwEWE4+3lqizrU4u9Xyh1m/C4O23ksgC6BBX f8Yg==
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=XyLbWcC8hEeC/niTBawD6XysBNfZLUcAcSjr5gVm3+8=; b=qPbKcfEsV0A90YoA6w4ppAyT+JiohkhYYtjtektoGCPl2R0NoTEWfiy14eDCZQiNcu 5scjQbGp1uZoYAZMIcqz//scqSc+Sv9B7/IA4J0eTFQk/4synrR3nwN7wtjzQAX8kMWz xldhM2rOlT25eXfXEBxW1k3zwQsKitsWUt11TmvT/mkru9a7mtnoY07qhDEkaxfDnoE7 dgWqS9MIEj+s6gwn6LJ6naBj0x4k8eVpoM+aQEXtCpZgwuFiXbxrCd8GmqdRqzmay49N 6LdqYs6wZkHQ7hNNMjwauFZSDUH8nykRbSP9/Ex359k37KKOecVe7Ph7gNRsij6uThwQ NOGw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVCuHSCEQIAzr83FyNHRBD6QCA1B2vVd2GOyWDZAUZD6XWTVtcm vOUMPIOPIRItkDT/Av1cNFGm5GoX
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwu7zwG2v44Y7Nf6KoRvWOOxOYLgeszhS2TSy+hfnGntPZEyIfXIBgXZDjyfErF76OMp1SLMA==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:1c65:: with SMTP id c37mr17478520pgm.31.1570226850454; Fri, 04 Oct 2019 15:07:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.30] (233.148.69.111.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [111.69.148.233]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id h6sm8023276pfg.123.2019.10.04.15.07.27 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 04 Oct 2019 15:07:29 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: "community" for the RFC series
To: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
Cc: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org, iab@iab.org, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
References: <394203C8F4EF044AA616736F@PSB> <4097464f-d038-2439-5ca5-70bac46b25ea@huitema.net> <69DAA6BBBE243BAD98926154@PSB> <750a842a-b527-82b9-e8b8-1d23fdc5cc72@cs.tcd.ie> <31b3720b-c8f1-3964-ae30-ce391007b3aa@gmail.com> <120cf3cb-31a6-7cc9-d6e3-7daee0f9d11d@cs.tcd.ie> <21c43d80-0e0b-4ee8-2cf6-232eb9b66f01@gmail.com> <66ad948c-e95f-e61c-20cd-c4376c393053@cs.tcd.ie> <c5765055-40e6-9e77-c090-e7a40f39c3a6@huitema.net>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <3ea3fbe0-d307-03b4-ed78-757ee6c2e0c1@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 05 Oct 2019 11:07:27 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <c5765055-40e6-9e77-c090-e7a40f39c3a6@huitema.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/iiK8uwgJZwnjCo2Hoq4F8bQdsXk>
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, 04 Oct 2019 22:07:33 -0000

On 05-Oct-19 07:21, Christian Huitema wrote:
> 
> On 10/4/2019 2:31 AM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>> On 04/10/2019 08:51, Christian Huitema wrote:
>>> I have heard Brian Carpenter's argument that if there is not an
>>> authorship community, there is a readership community. That leaves me
>>> skeptical. Clearly, authors and publishers should care about their
>>> readership, and I wish we had better ways to assess the impact of our
>>> publications. But passive readership does not create a community, no
>>> more than me reading ITU publications makes me part of the ITU
>>> community. What creates a community is engagement, contributions and
>>> sharing.
>> I guess I disagree with you there Christian - ISTM that
>> at the very least, people who read RFCs and write related
>> code that is part of many network stacks, but who do not
>> engage with the IETF or RFC editor at all, do deserve more
>> consideration than you imply. I can see arguments for a
>> bigger set of people deserving consideration but omitting
>> the above example set seems just broken to me.
> 
> 
> Sure, but if they don't somehow communicate, how do you know they are there?
> 
> And if they do communicate, the question is "with whom"? Where do they send the message saying that they are trying to implement protocol FOO but they don't get what section 3.1.5 of RFC XXXX really means? Slashdot? Stack overflow? Some Reddit group? Actually, it would be very nice if the IETF had a documented feedback channel for such exchanges. That would be a nice way to grow the community.

Yes, but it isn't just the IETF. It's all the streams, so the dispatcher for generic queries will have to be (at least externally) the RFC Editor, I think.

On the underlying point - the fuzziness of the community boundary - I really don't believe in magic, or that the community we should worry about is 7.7 billion people. But we would be deluding ourselves to think that we can count the members of the community; we can't even count the members of the IETF. So we really have to accept, IMHO, that there is an open-ended public service responsibility here, not just a responsibility to a well-defined closed community. And if an obscure network operator in Northern Elbonia has a comment to make on an RFC from 1969 tagged in the index as "(Status: UNKNOWN)", that is automatically part of the community discourse, even though we don't know which stream that RFC belongs to.

   Brian