Re: Some more thoughts about language and what to do next

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Fri, 31 July 2020 14:21 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@cisco.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 7BB8E3A133D for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 07:21:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.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 AAktzZBD0UDJ for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 07:21:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-2.cisco.com (aer-iport-2.cisco.com [173.38.203.52]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 790CF3A135A for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 07:21:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=946; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1596205290; x=1597414890; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc: content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=iPmsWBfKO/AFGgL/UerApXwK9ImSgy/VuKbHK+CxGNM=; b=O8r3bzv4BLnljVZZNtF6OckFhhelW66bm1yuD93TZB6O3N+FxRkiKYNB vxSS+8yksA3t2C3LEPdaNN+M0YmbqxsEsgttcQAX7hayG6mWkhIqGDJGT JiZagt1ulWVq9e486GMPighmtz5dwiyB3LA5aZEIC4w0oVcfw3P/vJ28Z w=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CLAQC2JyRf/xbLJq1gGwEBAQEBAQEBBQEBARIBAQEDAwEBAUCBSoNtASASLIQ1iQGHciWcDQsBAQEMAQEvBAEBhEwCgjQlOBMCAwEBCwEBBQEBAQIBBgRthWiFcQEBAQMBI0gOBQsLGAICJgICVwYTgyaBfWAgsAp2gTKFUoUCgQ4qjSiCAIE4DBCCHy4+hD2DFjOCLQSPM6ZXgmqDCpZ6Ax6RTo4prXCDVgIEBgUCFYFqI4FXMxoIGxU7KgGCPj4SGQ2caD8DMDcCBgEHAQEDCZBSAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.75,418,1589241600"; d="scan'208";a="28381826"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-3.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA; 31 Jul 2020 14:21:26 +0000
Received: from [10.61.225.116] ([10.61.225.116]) by aer-core-3.cisco.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 06VELP8p011142 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 31 Jul 2020 14:21:26 GMT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.120.23.2.1\))
Subject: Re: Some more thoughts about language and what to do next
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <20200731140536.GQ3100@localhost>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 16:21:25 +0200
Cc: The IETF List <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2E217C0C-2FD9-4420-BEB7-B62ED53F0B8C@cisco.com>
References: <09474801-7189-4C01-8242-163454C3E936@cisco.com> <20200731140536.GQ3100@localhost>
To: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.120.23.2.1)
X-Outbound-SMTP-Client: 10.61.225.116, [10.61.225.116]
X-Outbound-Node: aer-core-3.cisco.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/sVuJ829bxfGk4TDatpFjWdVJKEQ>
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, 31 Jul 2020 14:21:37 -0000

Hi Nico,

> On 31 Jul 2020, at 16:05, Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 10:10:37AM +0200, Eliot Lear wrote:
>> I’ve got a proposal for a way forward toward the bottom.  &tldr; be
>> iterative and do research.
> 
> I've got a better proposal: let the SAA and/or obudsperson,

I think we’re talking about two different things- how we speak on list, and what goes into our drafts and RFCs.  I’m suggesting general guidance to working groups as a BCP (no MUSTs but guidance), and just use the existing process to avoid terminology that one might expect to be offensive.

At the same time, let’s seek more guidance about all of this from experts and develop a real decision framework that is based on firm ground, as it were.  Once we get that we iterate.

As to how we speak on list, I have no problems with what you suggested.

Eliot