IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Fri, 31 July 2020 14:33 UTC

Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.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 29D663A0B74; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 07:33:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, 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 (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.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 EsrGLV-Y7Zka; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 07:33:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (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 C0AFD3A0B63; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 07:33:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0050093.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050093.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 06VEUV08030788; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 15:33:02 +0100
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=GjIJ4Ju8bSlu9aQ1kGU0S8i15sMkCUh64wxc7L5rIBY=; b=KDl2r//zU4I1FEE+lBYYw4Kw9R6O3ips8Cu6yvE74W2CAK736I0/15cILAqZkre8Pupm q5gJ7x4eVtVXBl/bfMbVklKowmbITDnAAR1rjjdM7KhzeZ7sY3doXHzHuYGvJp2QX/HZ +/Kz+ZyXHs1Cy2A9pI4q5mnySYKBYT6gkdLBgm9byrhyBM/fGGPaxXu2cFDcxMId6gOX tGuqZWF24cNa7k8WK38lGf5b1mJlD83qzg++vv8KUBOFTNwPZ9gKpa/1uBp6BJztWVe0 DeLJJ4WpbbGA+gAGUFaFHbCagYvVvOMXdO33FUNO5LkeYEG61MrcAnYNGCnikcXH7C4s Lg==
Received: from prod-mail-ppoint3 (a72-247-45-31.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com [72.247.45.31] (may be forged)) by m0050093.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 32m65rhg6r-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 31 Jul 2020 15:33:00 +0100
Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint3.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint3.akamai.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 06VDoYhN017772; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 10:32:59 -0400
Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.165.118]) by prod-mail-ppoint3.akamai.com with ESMTP id 32j4616a9v-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 31 Jul 2020 10:32:59 -0400
Received: from USTX2EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.165.119) by ustx2ex-dag1mb6.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.165.124) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 07:32:58 -0700
Received: from USTX2EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.165.119]) by ustx2ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.165.119]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Fri, 31 Jul 2020 09:32:58 -0500
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: Eliot Lear <lear=40cisco.com@dmarc.ietf.org>, Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
CC: The IETF List <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Some more thoughts about language and what to do next
Thread-Topic: Some more thoughts about language and what to do next
Thread-Index: AQHWZkj7BpsnGRmxjEWANwPlZASQoakiDpUAgAAEaYD//8ArgA==
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 14:32:58 +0000
Message-ID: <3BC71A67-CF13-4F82-9ABC-75F96068EDDE@akamai.com>
References: <09474801-7189-4C01-8242-163454C3E936@cisco.com> <20200731140536.GQ3100@localhost> <2E217C0C-2FD9-4420-BEB7-B62ED53F0B8C@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <2E217C0C-2FD9-4420-BEB7-B62ED53F0B8C@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.38.20061401
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [172.19.33.11]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <CDD09D1A86C9CB49AB6CB131C623C91C@akamai.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235, 18.0.687 definitions=2020-07-31_04:2020-07-31, 2020-07-31 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxlogscore=613 suspectscore=0 mlxscore=0 adultscore=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2007310102
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235, 18.0.687 definitions=2020-07-31_05:2020-07-31, 2020-07-31 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 adultscore=0 malwarescore=0 bulkscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=578 lowpriorityscore=0 clxscore=1011 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2007310108
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/yiX46zx4ohj4juHF57BvX_0YvSM>
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 14:33:05 -0000

>    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.

Yes.

Except maybe we can stop using particularly egregious words, as indicated by consensus.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email