Re: IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input

Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca> Wed, 25 May 2016 20:57 UTC

Return-Path: <paul@nohats.ca>
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 282CF12D9DA for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 May 2016 13:57:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.526
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.526 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.426] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 Ty-Oh-cVoFu7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 May 2016 13:57:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.nohats.ca (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:2a03:6000:1004:1::68]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D30E712D18D for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 May 2016 13:57:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3rFPjM3N6Zz391 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 May 2016 22:57:11 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mx.nohats.ca
Received: from mx.nohats.ca ([IPv6:::1]) by localhost (mx.nohats.ca [IPv6:::1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RmIMsbJRXOIM for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 May 2016 22:57:10 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from bofh.nohats.ca (206-248-139-105.dsl.teksavvy.com [206.248.139.105]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 May 2016 22:57:10 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C1E06801ECF; Wed, 25 May 2016 16:57:09 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 bofh.nohats.ca C1E06801ECF
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by bofh.nohats.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA341406B782 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 May 2016 16:57:09 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 25 May 2016 16:57:09 -0400 (EDT)
From: Paul Wouters <paul@nohats.ca>
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: IETF 100, Singapore -- proposed path forward and request for input
In-Reply-To: <75ca0a38-0807-a91f-5b2a-bab8f6fc7042@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.LRH.2.20.1605251647560.27848@bofh.nohats.ca>
References: <20160524210344.64781.qmail@ary.lan> <5f7621d7-326d-3d94-0b78-5a463dd6c496@gmail.com> <1940321298.573455.1464202942241.JavaMail.yahoo@mail.yahoo.com> <08f1ee7c-eb15-77bf-9e7e-5a164e5a38f9@gmail.com> <CAPt1N1mOMf9u+CXwhrjtD9R7FJOq1=6N+T3zHKJHVfSdy0t_Uw@mail.gmail.com> <d33789e4-caf5-21be-e4b1-a7d3065d43fe@gmail.com> <CAPt1N1mhK=p1YboDnKE5xF+gdMdXkOZBqbpaodkaq8jR0Lophw@mail.gmail.com> <75ca0a38-0807-a91f-5b2a-bab8f6fc7042@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (LRH 67 2015-01-07)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/tM4RbjVRw17Il24Gy4vT-ejEESw>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Wed, 25 May 2016 20:57:38 -0000

On Wed, 25 May 2016, Melinda Shore wrote:

> No, it's still not really working.
>
> Would we, for example, be willing to meet in a place that
> criminalizes Muslims or Jews or Hindus?  I sincerely hope not,
> and I don't think that we would.
>
> I suppose it would provide some small personal assurance if the IETF,
> in fact, would meet in such a place and the issue here is not that
> people here are comfortable excluding GLBT people as a class.  (I'd
> skip that meeting, too, for whatever it's worth).

I have been thinking about this. If we would meet in Dubai, then I would
not go because I'm an atheist which is a crime there and I don't feel
secure enough this is a "legacy law not enforced". However, I would not
be against the IETF meeting there because I do want us to try and be
inclusive of the Middle East, something we haven't done well so far.

However, I would hope we continue to strife to go to locations that are
as inclusive as possible. Which includes skipping the US if Mr. Trump
gets his no-Muslim rule enforced - as a practical statement, not a
political one.

Paul