Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: BCP 83 PR-Action Against Dan Harkins

Keith Moore <> Thu, 06 October 2022 21:41 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42742C159495 for <>; Thu, 6 Oct 2022 14:41:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.607
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.607 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YWHwVSkYyih7 for <>; Thu, 6 Oct 2022 14:40:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1EE7FC14CE44 for <>; Thu, 6 Oct 2022 14:40:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal []) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C6B6320083A for <>; Thu, 6 Oct 2022 17:40:55 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 06 Oct 2022 17:40:56 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=; h=cc:content-type:date:date:feedback-id :feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id :mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to :x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; t=1665092455; x=1665178855; bh=jJLjlcQ8PPrRJ5EpUI4QJTd90EnX mZ9mlV0btn7yX/I=; b=nFfrTO7Le6AOKt4yCttZ5FH4ULq6fG92wgLpnMS/5RrS aWZz0Bah3qpSVsSbBXuWmTAJ2sn7UcZN8IRA6bI/hraId2ZR7JScmfuVSgVDJ221 x/3SMec8hKgSjvO9roHn90B2twwIBV6v/Y9glkDEeo7V0NYTBh98wlzakpOSzmJ1 H1o9FZmOyDnyL+B3QYZri2oMc2D8P/994Ifg6Oo+EqDvBu063A0kHDlvDlEY0r8l T8j3wp6jAG6dY6AucA+o/I9QLbZI/v5ui8OUB2LVVnRnNQLPmTTwyI8flY3O5Xue yTrgnEoP2djkn4U5G4ABozqEOMOEDxH4tYT1A5D9yQ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:Z0s_Y90gcaBfetSNqQ5-cAuMwB6KUDgivn16hv1W24hastjxbwnhUQ> <xme:Z0s_Y0GoYy11Kpjs-IEG2rPzc-UES9LhauakX4q12veGNoZ17vc4t3I2KjrC59xzN AEpJy-_CrdcZQ>
X-ME-Received: <xmr:Z0s_Y95h5U0kAp-i9vHWzWeW-1sLqVbRtT-cfKDvEoeP2Hmm_oYnT8vaAijs7ShEpOt5MZuttG4BR-uzRRcEXP9-KFbG0A7svjx5SCv_Yv7YCghFjbtOdg>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrfeeiiecutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurf hrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegr ihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurheptgfkffggfgfuvfhfhfgjsegrtderredtfe ejnecuhfhrohhmpefmvghithhhucfoohhorhgvuceomhhoohhrvgesnhgvthifohhrkhdq hhgvrhgvthhitghsrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeehfeduvdeggfefveeiie fggeeludefjeduieetledugeefffelffevieffkeeiffenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigv pedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmohhorhgvsehnvghtfihorhhkqdhhvg hrvghtihgtshdrtghomh
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:Z0s_Y62LI0KOYJZEFT0WqdR3coZlYOs32tR7P74TWGCFG47qaqW-AQ> <xmx:Z0s_YwGrXx79DuJeQ-65TqK2dHBlXnDtv-MVfYBLvd_IUDl8EvRCvg> <xmx:Z0s_Y79RMea8hDpt-dxgo_duN_jTgD8VT6VGIiogzhBf-wuwNf73nQ> <xmx:Z0s_Y0TqP4Eean6-8LGKO5utSUEQRtzKuC5qIeGe3LITbISFnE-JDw>
Feedback-ID: i5d8c41f0:Fastmail
Received: by (Postfix) with ESMTPA for <>; Thu, 6 Oct 2022 17:40:55 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------snd5MZ1x3d1WO3HL430wywXD"
Message-ID: <>
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2022 17:40:54 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.11.0
Content-Language: en-US
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
From: Keith Moore <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Last-Call] Last Call: BCP 83 PR-Action Against Dan Harkins
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Last Calls <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2022 21:41:01 -0000

On 10/6/22 17:19, Bless, Roland (TM) wrote:

> Sorry, I'm not a native speaker and to me lampooning is a kind of
> humiliation. In order to help you understand the problem, let me
> take Dan's line of argumentation and transfer it to another scenario:
> guess how a disabled person, e.g., needing a wheelchair, feels if
> someone claims that this person is just doing that in order to get
> "privileges" like reserved parking lots or seats in the first row etc.?
Oh sure, and I've even made a similar mistake before.    Fortunately my 
friend with cystic fibrosis was patient and kind, and was able to simply 
explain to me that yes, sometimes she really did have trouble breathing 
and needed to use a handicapped parking space just so she could walk 
from her car to the door.  (Handicaps are not always obvious.)
> Nevertheless, you should accept that there are obviously people in the
> IETF community that interpret Dan's writing as being offensive or even
> racist.
I do understand that.  But those are some pretty serious accusations to 
make out of a mere misunderstanding.   And when /any/ person is accused 
of something as despised as racism, I suspect their normal reaction is 
to be defensive rather than to ask whether (and how) there might be some 
truth in it.
> Ok, apparently we have quite different views on that, but as I already
> wrote: as soon as there is feedback that Dan's messages are perceived
> as being offensive (and this feedback has been given several times),
> an adequate reaction should have been to stop writing these kind of
> messages, but Dan deliberately continued to write teasing messages.

For me the question is whether there was sufficient explanation of which 
kinds of messages were causing the problem, and why. It's not always 
obvious to everyone.

Most of the messages cited in the Last Call seemed fairly inoffensive to 
me, and for many of them I could not be sure I had identified what IESG 
were objecting to.