Re: Registration details for IETF 108

Melinda Shore <> Sun, 31 May 2020 21:44 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51BB03A0DEE for <>; Sun, 31 May 2020 14:44:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4__7Y-9H3M62 for <>; Sun, 31 May 2020 14:44:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::431]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 420E53A0DEC for <>; Sun, 31 May 2020 14:44:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id 64so2508987pfg.8 for <>; Sun, 31 May 2020 14:44:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=DE7KdZW7+rN9V6KgACo76PmhygrPdiUEj0QqgG1WtIs=; b=M85V5ffCJITRIRiMXBLCjbiu1/8ZFWNwFYpt5HjLc/ZT29ehtrE0caabWVM8r+KXft Yr0eCIreA+sjT57Cgc8mPw60zUXOX+cmXNYu8FOOFXtmjzXkXcBHXSWaSxe19179f53n WgGBF8I28yyFbh9D6Zu/wHcFsN0jo8Qb29Ydqc819bGw/9zRB48nyemrcFe/ieDdzxhA 8TYZ0NJtQKryxTJfQNRlFsk7JEZEvfaSrmB1cm2UK7U6RTPH1qgDE5+x28iiHGN0UuNt k46K9rLyAuGZdO6tQkK8SbT2bsbL6HJJV0HZd4rh097zoKSADs4ikBnN12tObfeIXDVF NSDw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=DE7KdZW7+rN9V6KgACo76PmhygrPdiUEj0QqgG1WtIs=; b=i32/2AxgySNEEbq5185Mn+l/QghqjEDGqPyVk4c9MxVuoe6QpOG8DbBP6UZx2pKApK hR8Nh4TtvVecJlQ4ak7VJBLVpfaWk4xIa1OclZaWBhqv6WSdaLdaFj/Y6pEeUNj8GLqE JZTMQ+MjT9t87NUMXgc+gJNgw14Dxw6AE9jfv0uSxkgrjw1lVTsThZDFFqFVW4o5dqIh 3R/LFjgiq+Xo+O7fn6vk1lHTMipz+OdI1mfNeg8R4foN12w//nBhexXn+i/CPqdXfMwE XlW+oJLsVMpd4AIhr/72NVoPJadQs3wRfjqj4EK/m19hECdtcLTb9W0jjBTRrObVeF2y bDvA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532oeLtgLJB2XdZ59NLrb66be626+sX2vDd68mDTUTyOoZNJr1sS HSi+PS6rJZeR5Vg9po618pNaGUel
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyIJKRkWRtru8jPdoL9kGPafATQgFfVmmCQ7fiTmQHI31Stx3GuLhm9ya9wDxWT09dNThrgrQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:6d86:: with SMTP id i128mr16188861pgc.432.1590961483887; Sun, 31 May 2020 14:44:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aspen.local ([]) by with ESMTPSA id ep10sm5186975pjb.25.2020. for <> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 31 May 2020 14:44:42 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: Registration details for IETF 108
References: <> <> <>
From: Melinda Shore <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Sun, 31 May 2020 13:44:41 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 31 May 2020 21:44:47 -0000

On 5/31/20 1:13 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> I don't think the characterization of this as "pay-to-play" is accurate. You
> are certainly free to participate in mailing lists, github, etc.

I'm somewhat troubled by this, as well, tbh.  To the extent that
the IETF has gradually and effectively moved to having decisions
made in meetings it would be unfortunate indeed to exclude
people based on financial circumstances.  I'd like to see the
decision-making situation fixed but given the history of that
discussion I think we are where we are, and free remote participation
provides at least some mitigation.  I also tend to think that
saying that meeting participation isn't necessary because {mailing
lists,Github,whatever} is incompatible with the insistence that
the IETF continue to meet because it's not really possible to
progress work without real-time discussion.  I'll also note that
for as long as there's been a remote participation option available
it's been free.  We're now in the odd position of having all-remote
meetings absorb what used to be "remote participants" into the
group of "participants," with some consequential side-effects
(although arguably there are no such things as side-effects, just

I do think this decision has some unintended consequences.
Scholarships or other subsidy might provide some mitigation
but would potentially be messy/awkward.  The organization
is long overdue for some navel-gazing about working methods.
It's unreasonable to expect perfect consistency but I think
things have gotten a little more incoherent than they should


Melinda Shore

Software longa, hardware brevis