Re: Concerns about Singapore

Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 07 April 2016 18:30 UTC

Return-Path: <dhruv.ietf@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 7AC2712D164 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 11:30:45 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 q_pjcUHrtIiZ for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 11:30:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io0-x22f.google.com (mail-io0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22f]) (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 71FD612D0F0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 11:30:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io0-x22f.google.com with SMTP id 2so104359158ioy.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 07 Apr 2016 11:30:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc; bh=acUp88XXysDFl4vafGmyqj4yjsMgsw0l9qHUIK23goE=; b=sq7Vx0q5h1KuCFUbdj2EW6PxaxZLejDWAGDeRYlOOE6MTWQK7EwfLel4N/fmN40bSv 2eZGJ4yhiC3TIJaZn1RBQnRhXrBN/F0BzPzfG9xGUUyplTwioT/KOC9phGK8sekSEdzG QtyHGf44zmeeJy4XcsRs+plzEK6NDl4+Ow5mW4g8Z09lCJ/mY/U65YRaLSkNkKorHgWG BPmo7/8SNd1GfOU9sxOLS1DuOlbRLjyOCfGWr9ikh0C7Kx08U9IWsoink5N9PrP80gYp S3cZivEC4feCaEn/TUzWb0WIHSQZ/12ipl/qHreihTSIdS3JQx+MFPo7llfjMthJqAmK Nsww==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=acUp88XXysDFl4vafGmyqj4yjsMgsw0l9qHUIK23goE=; b=gvbH/ZLWk8mhLdMAHQ/LH5e2QsFq79gZivomxAm4VMDANIVggg7Zcs59FHoHmvdikM bDkSFhCgKwBlTtQ4Zx9dXpyYE4s+On2oBqVt82ufabEM8Iabf8nxiAxI+7fOlFORxjti 0YP+OzmNfeIeKJNYrp76YzoAa52rho4gcxqJNizeUnoCiPhUgIJzO5m8MrD4FoTS3GV5 BiYQQB6z1BQIl0pTvVdCAnSpP+JRESsjMiDSVgZNlgZzEJM8p3y5/5dDLmbIIaIk/yDe 7Q09JNnmqPt34mqbbwnpGudtWH+QVkVJqA9ya1xaByd459v4tHuEjU0slvXvuJWvdO4u rS3Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJIdsxGsuQU5MFQm76xhP8M4pMJu9t/NSUZImW6HA/nLW+EKoN1/dtoXoSIsWDpvsxn+Bz/lnqzeErOCwQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.162.17 with SMTP id l17mr5731744ioe.42.1460053842769; Thu, 07 Apr 2016 11:30:42 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: dhruvdhody@gmail.com
X-Google-Sender-Delegation: dhruvdhody@gmail.com
Received: by 10.50.222.71 with HTTP; Thu, 7 Apr 2016 11:30:42 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20160407182936.GA21340@pfrc.org>
References: <0D914666-C3D4-4CCE-AD5E-4E5B34EA1A73@piuha.net> <20160407182936.GA21340@pfrc.org>
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2016 15:30:42 -0300
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 4c-otB4i90p2jzT2QE6tY7a6MG8
Message-ID: <CAB75xn780nNDjGa_Cc222J20-+1CCHt09Xp8KHzaK=n0xx51pg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Concerns about Singapore
From: Dhruv Dhody <dhruv.ietf@gmail.com>
To: Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11409936a6bf02052fe94667
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/x0WxGWtPIPwKdFG5ks2Azj-tddU>
Cc: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
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: Thu, 07 Apr 2016 18:30:45 -0000

+1

I am happy to see that LGBT inclusiveness taken seriously by the IETF. But
looking at the law on the books in black and white, would be doing a
disservice to a large region of the world (with a large number of Internet
users).

Dhruv (Impacted on 2 fronts)

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 3:29 PM, Jeffrey Haas <jhaas@pfrc.org> wrote:

> Jari,
>
> On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 12:31:20PM -0300, Jari Arkko wrote:
> > I know that I am personally still in the education phase about the
> > situation. But I wanted to follow-up with two points from an IETF
> > perspective. First, the ability of our participants to enter our meetings
> > without concerns is of crucial importance for us.
>
> As I'm unclear whether I'll be free for mtgvenue, I'll make my statement
> here:
>
> The legal environments of the various countries we consider for venues
> obviously must be a general consideration for our selection criteria.  For
> most considerations, these are "here are thing you do not do - they are not
> legal".
>
> For this particular issue, the consideration is whether the people
> themselves
> are the thing that is illegal.
>
> While I am unclear on the full legal status of lgbt persons as "illegal
> people" within the proposed venue, the laws on the books are obviously
> unfriendly.  However, I'll note that even countries that contribute a large
> number of our participants have laws on their books that may be similarly
> negative and yet are generally known to not be enforced.  This includes the
> US and India.
>
> I am happy to see that this consideration is being given discussion.
>
> -- Jeff (one of the impacted parties)
>
>