Re: [Internetgovtech] Cross community

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Thu, 24 July 2014 18:17 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.com>
X-Original-To: internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05DDF1A00FA for <internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Jul 2014 11:17:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.791
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.791 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=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 Qdhi5_NHJbnL for <internetgovtech@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 24 Jul 2014 11:17:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31F2E1A0353 for <internetgovtech@iab.org>; Thu, 24 Jul 2014 11:17:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.224.134.226]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s6OIH2hR014003 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 24 Jul 2014 11:17:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1406225836; x=1406312236; bh=i07lGx570qjUtTwgnSVtjjAIBFgsF08niyBqHILUH40=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=Du2CvjNGxge9CKuM4v8lek3b23Kn0AWkmMyq4GJ4ZzUmnNjPCZSaubBw9J4rjmBDx CU6xgatFgQ5YZBXhqxOvdQVHSXyPYv6f246/UJJBUN4SSFroz2BgPUajfPbpyRvwWn bPSiYjE6ytx0N6sEhwRvdWd9/VUNgjgxg66oICz4=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1406225836; x=1406312236; i=@elandsys.com; bh=i07lGx570qjUtTwgnSVtjjAIBFgsF08niyBqHILUH40=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=poKef2vMvB0RVF/LawC8gwaGnHc3LHfCRRApRVXYt7Lnze2JmxDj+Mc946T+Um4Q+ FGJQcbrUPXXRRfEtdLzdCXHrVx5HS6VcowSThcIT5aI9lphkvWdykZL5g2wuUp6qgj PN7sys6xwCSUh3cgGAuJkmhNCFnR0roBcUab4pmY=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20140724084607.0bb21040@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 10:08:33 -0700
To: John Curran <jcurran@istaff.org>
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <9DBA0ECE-D26D-463F-858A-B990B68BDDD1@istaff.org>
References: <A193D048-2B67-469A-93BA-C61BB362DA75@vigilsec.com> <53CD1E8A.1060804@acm.org> <FA4238C4-ADDC-435F-9591-E3B074C2F6F6@vigilsec.com> <53CD2300.5050307@acm.org> <20140721143105.GH16966@mx1.yitter.info> <53CD291E.1020801@acm.org> <9045EC0A-E123-4CDC-B87F-5BC32C644C85@istaff.org> <53CD57E8.4000909@acm.org> <B7163126-31B6-4CC6-A711-F225051C294A@istaff.org> <53CD8F41.9060909@gih.com> <53CD939D.5020001@cisco.com> <9DE8F705-9748-407D-8E77-7B787ACD9873@gmail.com> <53CE4B39.1090202@acm.org> <53D016B6.2020000@gih.com> <53D01E6B.8020606@gmail.com> <53D025F3.5050708@acm.org> <53D02828.1030805@gmail.com> <53D02D53.6070501@acm.org> <6.2.5.6.2.20140724012237.0ce22978@resistor.net> <9DBA0ECE-D26D-463F-858A-B990B68BDDD1@istaff.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/internetgovtech/ee2zjQn6myv3eRLkw8hNLj5GeNk
Cc: internetgovtech@iab.org, Avri Doria <avri@acm.org>
Subject: Re: [Internetgovtech] Cross community
X-BeenThere: internetgovtech@iab.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internet Governance and IETF technical work <internetgovtech.iab.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/options/internetgovtech>, <mailto:internetgovtech-request@iab.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.iab.org/mail-archive/web/internetgovtech/>
List-Post: <mailto:internetgovtech@iab.org>
List-Help: <mailto:internetgovtech-request@iab.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/internetgovtech>, <mailto:internetgovtech-request@iab.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 18:17:21 -0000

Hi John,
At 07:16 24-07-2014, John Curran wrote:
>You seem to believe that the IETF does not make "policy" for identifiers,
>but in fact, IANA registries are specifically required to have policies
>(see RFC 5226, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in
>RFCs") so that the IANA knows what exactly to do in administration.

My choice of words was incorrect.  You explained it better in the 
paragraph quoted below.

>Now it is true that these policies are generally technical in nature and
>tend to avoid "public policy" positions, but that is not a hard requirement
>for either IETF protocols or the associated registries.  For example, it
>is possible for the IETF to define a protocol (e.g. an enhancement to DNS)
>whereby the protocol itself has some embedded rules for certain identifiers
>(e.g. the string "curran" shall always return empty set on any query...)

Ok.

>Thankfully, the IETF doesn't generally engage in such things, and instead
>usually constrains itself to technical constraints on the protocols and
>associated registries; thus the keeping the IETF protocols very popular
>and enabling the success of the Internet that we've all come to enjoy.
>
>It's worth encouraging the IETF to work on predominantly technical issues,
>and to delegate the public policy issues that come with general purpose
>registries to bodies which are supported by the affected community, but
>at the end of the day, that is nothing more than a polite suggestion to the
>IETF, and may or may not be followed.  If the IETF were to make a serious
>misstep, then it runs the risk of parties going elsewhere to work on their
>protocol standard needs, and that's likely a reasonable deterrent with a
>natural counterbalance.

Yes.

The problem is that it is not always clear at the time the decision 
was taken whether the misstep is serious.  In addition, there are a 
handful of people who would bother to raise any objection if 
something is considered as a misstep as:

   (a) The person is not making or losing money because of the decision; or

   (b) The person will be labelled as querulous.

   (c) It is bad for the person's career.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy