Re: [Gendispatch] Academia (Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF)

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Fri, 26 February 2021 07:50 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.org>
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 6D8AA3A09A5; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 23:50:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org
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 ZhQdfztrNQ6R; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 23:50:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:211:32ff:fe22:186f]) (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 DF1903A099F; Thu, 25 Feb 2021 23:50:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:b9:15ed:9bd5:c92f] (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:b9:15ed:9bd5:c92f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5A4CA60030F; Fri, 26 Feb 2021 09:50:44 +0200 (EET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1614325844; bh=LcB/W3B3K+pw0CbPnUgolcLtfaXmftetEsm+CKmf9Ks=; h=From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References; b=wwSgdQlALKPkh/EH4zPDSwZROA05sCOseYfyA29p5DHgoFY/40oU9vCZn1T1iaWBR haekpqixzujsn05gV8rtoKPMdeHcygRP9h2I4Jjie9eVrt/fe5ugk3X9fhp99tnGwH x5P0pPdrwmScqKCifByGoF0YIUTIZ8Ls2vf03dPY=
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
Message-Id: <48880C2B-E8E6-4AD7-BC02-D1507996F813@eggert.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5DE9D16D-4996-4355-8B50-EA1588969F32"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.60.0.2.21\))
Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Academia (Re: Diversity and Inclusiveness in the IETF)
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2021 09:50:43 +0200
In-Reply-To: <6006aa81-613d-04ea-4666-c7f3eaa4f63b@si6networks.com>
Cc: Theresa Enghardt <ietf@tenghardt.net>, GENDISPATCH List <gendispatch@ietf.org>, Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
To: Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com>
References: <37eecb9b-f0eb-e21c-b162-b1f0339e4981@si6networks.com> <41698b83-25ff-574e-390a-65a8c3dc591a@tenghardt.net> <eba4c0ba-830c-acc2-1e6d-cab480c61ee3@si6networks.com> <e0bd1f0a-92a3-abe0-1382-dab2f312d4cd@tenghardt.net> <0e35a879-b814-ca37-5d8a-1f8e18c2d4a2@si6networks.com> <b1a58fd2-d26a-4480-9b81-67875a635ecd@tenghardt.net> <201DFFC0-89D9-4653-A500-8DDC6ACDE667@eggert.org> <6006aa81-613d-04ea-4666-c7f3eaa4f63b@si6networks.com>
X-MailScanner-ID: 5A4CA60030F.A2623
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/yTvAcXB4l_Axd9xI87GC0J9gFqg>
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, 26 Feb 2021 07:50:57 -0000

Hi,

On 2021-2-25, at 20:00, Fernando Gont <fgont@si6networks.com> wrote:
> On 25/2/21 14:29, Lars Eggert wrote:
>> One thing we did to increase the value of RFCs to academics was to assign them DOIs, which at least for universities in some geos is a prerequisite to even recognizing RFCs as academic output.
> 
> Was the rationale documented anywhere?  (since this might be of value to note/reference, along with your other note above).

not as far as I know. This was discussed a bunch of times at various IRSG meetings ~5 years ago. (As as the decision on how to schedule the ANRW.)

Thanks,
Lars