RE: IETF Slack workspace (attempt to redirect to SHMOOWG)

Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org> Fri, 28 August 2020 21:52 UTC

Return-Path: <masinter@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 80F613A0CD3; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 14:52:39 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no 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 o66OV4jLiWMK; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 14:52:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-x62d.google.com (mail-pl1-x62d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62d]) (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 492883A0CD2; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 14:52:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-x62d.google.com with SMTP id q3so271402pls.11; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 14:52:38 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:thread-index:content-language; bh=5iyh9qN9JQR5idhE88v+AJE/anY3WUlVyOnDMnfbpV4=; b=UK2rYkrYJqGABtLhw1jqIWn+ze5yklfI5iEpvflqxv3oppzJfI8VnoTW9F8JCApWJg Abt03k9wALtz9Os7jamU9jc/glngBxPDKcvkyzHEkteoYXKAsvTvOs48Zb+ThZ0zXkU7 Ir6GttiQ/5HYcYJ/cvhmvSzXgfVQK8ZfcvkJbGzOqXKM9/fHcFj7hrWJ0SI/jhl3EkMD w+mpJa8wTQqkQX9CdehEEr/F6PHMeDHdthHDTAxknPQBghgPGtmg2Sf/pTsSrUDyEAqA 0h3sb2V5dEePSac4TDLcI9MqSkwJzrv723gSa6d6plw91Ewtds4V1796fz3NgXY4FbSp JhIQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:thread-index :content-language; bh=5iyh9qN9JQR5idhE88v+AJE/anY3WUlVyOnDMnfbpV4=; b=QhLr92UqZgt6qqvqf9OG3Y8Ux4iIyKK0X3nmBp6+O7bBOcqzIVbuFlTBvuvz7eY0Fr 2FWcEcs/eCQLKm90NFcfXRiBa9ffwvwpr6rfWrNyNVFg46G/o2zx9ZedofSEQmkxdDrc 70ABr7zEKDAO72TONyjx60wQnqkpY4HvDL1+EL0LNXNyC2nQTA9O7K0MNQMqFjV5CFaL bDnVr4X/hdjE52Y1s55vJB6D+KM4ORoeBnkn19QV2u8sHVHA4Czcn040qFqchSyCAAYS Yz6JF1zRrPXFjR5wRTmjdzUs8OALSm64kmGuod7AvyrVxLGo2ucXc9b7XgTzeZtkLvUM SJ4w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531GiEZ43hDpSHX/onSRCpbqNYDAEfLFRs3AjJ/rE9JdD64qUevM xdkzGjf8oVlAdQahEv9S6m59Zn6NihY=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJygxkY17YU22PXwDBk+LlYXcl3Sn9XbAxdMWk7D8y/zrhVjJv3nRp4xYGdFAYrx33HpwKQ0tA==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b082:: with SMTP id p2mr696296plr.266.1598651557128; Fri, 28 Aug 2020 14:52:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from TVPC (c-67-169-101-78.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [67.169.101.78]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j81sm376976pfd.213.2020.08.28.14.52.35 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 28 Aug 2020 14:52:36 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Larry Masinter <masinter@gmail.com>
From: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
X-Google-Original-From: "Larry Masinter" <lmm@acm.org>
To: manycouches@ietf.org
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: IETF Slack workspace (attempt to redirect to SHMOOWG)
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2020 14:52:36 -0700
Message-ID: <00fa01d67d85$8b952ca0$a2bf85e0$@acm.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0
Thread-Index: AdZ9g2uu0SKxjz6uTvqrQs3Iqq0iGQ==
Content-Language: en-us
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/tCzbJ4sdx6jRWPpQJNf2ACSunXo>
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, 28 Aug 2020 21:52:40 -0000

I'm all in favor of experiments, but the interface and ease of use are not
the only evaluation criteria for deciding on tools. Gateways to standards
are good for some use cases but have their own attack surfaces.

If there are going to be more experiments, do some experimental design.
What are the criteria to evaluate? Information leakage? Moderation tools? 
DoS defense? Administration costs? Integration ability with 3rd party tools?
Standards where available and complete?

Unfortunately, the policy issues around suppressing disruptive behavior
depends on the details of the implementation. We know about mailing list
abuse and the difficulties of deciding which party hit the other one first
and who gets a timeout; the more rapid the conversation, the more likely
you'll see conflicts arise. 

And please use  the enterprise edition, and run it on IETF hosts, accounts,
etc.
Test the installation and dependencies and any "phone home" attempts.

I think running experiments with informed consent of the experimental
subjects would likely point toward finding WG interim meetings before
experimenting with all of IETF.

--
https://LarryMasinter.net https://interlisp.org