Re: IETF chair's blog
Brian Trammell <trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch> Mon, 25 February 2013 06:52 UTC
Return-Path: <trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
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 B265F21F91D5 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Feb 2013 22:52:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.186
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.186 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.413, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id d8m4oH5ma9h8 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Feb 2013 22:52:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.ee.ethz.ch (smtp.ee.ethz.ch [129.132.2.219]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8ED2321F91C5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Feb 2013 22:52:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.ee.ethz.ch (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB38DD9307; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 07:52:22 +0100 (MET)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new on smtp.ee.ethz.ch
Received: from smtp.ee.ethz.ch ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.ee.ethz.ch [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 5R1gLgCoef6e; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 07:52:22 +0100 (MET)
Received: from [10.0.27.102] (cust-integra-122-165.antanet.ch [80.75.122.165]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: briant) by smtp.ee.ethz.ch (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 74D14D9304; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 07:52:22 +0100 (MET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\))
Subject: Re: IETF chair's blog
From: Brian Trammell <trammell@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
In-Reply-To: <8A832DDC-1D5E-4C1B-87BB-36A384937480@lacnic.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 07:52:21 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <959ECB50-4DFE-4A66-81DB-36EF64BF5971@tik.ee.ethz.ch>
References: <1BBAE003-DEA4-462A-998D-863F6FF90A69@ietf.org> <51298B1E.60007@lacnic.net> <512A5A10.4090406@acm.org> <8A832DDC-1D5E-4C1B-87BB-36A384937480@lacnic.net>
To: Arturo Servin <aservin@lacnic.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499)
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 06:52:24 -0000
Hi, Arturo, all, It does not seem appropriate for a technical standards organization dedicated to making the Internet work better through the development of open standards to implicitly endorse "communication protocols" which are based on closed access to distributed databases through interfaces that can and do change at the whim of the organizations that control them, further where those organizations have demonstrated a willingness to assert editorial control over the content they disseminate. If a social network were to emerge that allows open participation at _every_ level, based on an open application protocol therefor, that would be something different. I fear that network effects have already made such a thing unlikely in this iteration of "Internet x.0". (Aside: I myself have used all three listed networks to get attention for ISOC functions at the chapter level, though I'm uneasy about that. I won't dispute that they're great for outreach, and when you're doing outreach, you have to go where the people are. In my defense, though, I was advertising a talk wherein I discussed why it's a bad idea to rely on such closed platforms. :) ) Cheers, Brian On Feb 25, 2013, at 2:21 AM, Arturo Servin <aservin@lacnic.net> wrote: > > Why not? > > I, my organization and many more (included ISOC) have found them very useful for outreach activities. I do not see why the IETF shouldn't. Please, tell me. > > > as > > Sent from my iPad > > On 25 Feb 2013, at 02:21, Marc Petit-Huguenin <petithug@acm.org> wrote: > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA256 >> >> On 02/23/2013 07:38 PM, Arturo Servin wrote: >>> >>> Very good initiative. >>> >>> Twitter, Google+, Facebook, etc. could be the next steps. Let's embrace new >>> tools to collaborate. >> >> Let's not. Collaboration based on software running on servers run by the IETF >> or a contractor payed by the IETF is fine. Using collaboration tools owned by >> the entities you listed, or similar entities, is not. >> >>> >>> Regards, as >>> >>> On 22/02/2013 20:35, IETF Chair wrote: >>>> Jari has created a blog as an experiment to see if would be possible to >>>> provide periodic status reports and other thoughts from the chair. >>>> Here's the link: >>>> >>>> http://www.ietf.org/blog/2013/02/chairs-blog/ >> >> >> - -- >> Marc Petit-Huguenin >> Email: marc@petit-huguenin.org >> Blog: http://blog.marc.petit-huguenin.org >> Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/petithug >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >> Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) >> >> iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJRKloIAAoJECnERZXWan7EOMQP/05jtr5JVAQVZJJlP/At7cOx >> wEYxU5Z/v5wn21m0BfCqnfFxXhAOP+/vGje785gS+GPZZktnWffQu7JN0TNny8Rn >> U4nhgA19x7wdtz0jtTAV92JF4pEI2ZZ8uv74EoLzCobFW+biAy5jJM9mGFy+MqKB >> tuXIQpYc5dDRxmQe8szGWoVw6+ycGLfsHgZdeOZGhjPO7cSwnYboQ5w5/4WIhpe/ >> Pd9hTvsig0D6dBB3Dwl+rC8T0lzP4+yqHgfF6Y7+kS0rjToWdbA1R87GVxtVip1q >> 08HL8DGRicfrxVrpezvQOO3D5aNjbe3tdu3zyff5jZHMg19OLPvM9hE66sFBSuHp >> 5pLt2jdTceG5BIwSc0u6+cIbGxFTVTO1+aU86K7SPzxlWNryWbDpPStUKszl7X9h >> 8fu7a4A5Jd1o5BgqIqtDNrLbdtrMP4p0emuLOaTA2GayQqfMi3tDlhgzHAF1jgpS >> osWxUOhK6kaM441lFr9eJ/fTX130WnreDHoBhh3Fu090jukNZGBwqnSLkFrkqANO >> L/4u0Q3YchSvh/NQO4d/mEha+y7vQ202shsT4cgm6OsiPYe5iCoPuPbFlexpPF8m >> DQvoOyFjMmyJzpaEkzO0PBXYhgLEIynx/O7vq89/4R3SDU96t+aHnl5nxGmS/NDb >> L8j1K0cpZ12CfCaGQevT >> =4P1+ >> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- IETF chair's blog IETF Chair
- Re: IETF chair's blog Hector Santos
- Re: IETF chair's blog Alejandro Acosta
- Re: IETF chair's blog DM Abreu
- Re: IETF chair's blog Arturo Servin
- Re: IETF chair's blog Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: IETF chair's blog Arturo Servin
- Re: IETF chair's blog Brian Trammell
- Re: IETF chair's blog Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: IETF chair's blog Arturo Servin
- Re: IETF chair's blog Arturo Servin
- Re: IETF chair's blog Martin Sustrik
- Re: IETF chair's blog Fred Baker (fred)
- Re: IETF chair's blog Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: IETF chair's blog Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IETF chair's blog Arturo Servin
- Re: IETF chair's blog Michael Tuexen
- Re: IETF chair's blog Simon Pietro Romano
- Re: IETF chair's blog Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IETF chair's blog Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: IETF chair's blog Alejandro Acosta
- Re: IETF chair's blog Dale R. Worley
- Re: IETF chair's blog jari.arkko
- Vendor standardization (was: IETF chair's blog) SM
- Re: IETF chair's blog Simon Pietro Romano
- Re: IETF chair's blog Carsten Bormann
- Re: IETF chair's blog Hector Santos
- Re: IETF chair's blog Randy Bush
- Re: IETF chair's blog Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: IETF chair's blog Randy Bush
- Re: IETF chair's blog Arturo Servin
- Re: IETF chair's blog falsehood911
- Re: IETF chair's blog Carlos M. Martinez
- Meetecho archive down? / Availability of collabor… Simon Leinen
- Re: Meetecho archive down? / Availability of coll… Simon Pietro Romano
- Re: Meetecho archive down? / Availability of coll… Simon Leinen
- Re: Meetecho archive down? / Availability of coll… Simon Pietro Romano