Re: [Mtgvenue] Issue #21: unfiltered should be mandatory (was: Re: issue #3: Too many mandatory)

Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 18 April 2017 14:55 UTC

Return-Path: <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A575F12EC1D for <mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 07:55:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 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_NONE=-0.0001, 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 A7cTDPU5Mn9r for <mtgvenue@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 07:55:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr0-x232.google.com (mail-wr0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::232]) (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 1A70212EC96 for <mtgvenue@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 07:55:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr0-x232.google.com with SMTP id l28so104236476wre.0 for <mtgvenue@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 07:55:00 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=9wLaA/pGKkVkGi60bqgiK0Hac1v2u6aZUeahLzoEkqE=; b=AtCYdI4e2cadkGigkl/Cd/6A5KetWxwPe33O4rqwIAUVMNWrQVOgwHE3D6lPkgOx/q PH64Akt4KGIbr7+dQxBf+vZYZr9OGB9Tdql8HYsCyK8aFNml8MLLW0Zm5DAmddqBC72w UlnPekpeEHm6QhlLTVgto90CJsZTrDulH2HAqyWDOdpG/w09LqQ8T6CiO7TiaWxKin79 eADKX+GD78cJvF1A+zf0YxaZkV/fNfwaIMcdDlPcVRwSwa10HYRQFAD+BUS0wfFES8X3 Jv71q8GWHslC2HOkcgPS7IRSM2IRK7JJadJy9Pw374Jb3QmhU8BTl3jJkyeVtMeFFjpR 6Lgg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=9wLaA/pGKkVkGi60bqgiK0Hac1v2u6aZUeahLzoEkqE=; b=TfrrxoEb8wZlB6AHKYqZ6vpwFgCoSxdpkd313XLvXS4xXrBjEsZjQubiDUo17XUCFk Jn7/daBc2P+kEGvwN9DL2tQwH4bLvPWR5B26VKIy2hn8PBaHHwKuh/264z4JOGDIwNTi uVBt5Tf81mwVUEAFy+W1GovBKjANGlGOR9lZnf9gVwuRk/z7KA4eIiwq0aXsv7DuZlq7 w0Ym8DCuA+TzaVoiCfnVZPvY3O1MVj9m6oXU1Mwsz3hfdPPiLvRaLl0TSmRH9/TJPupL n99NrUzqBt/FZEnopUKrZhat8BpbqZcngxPE9P8deHSanCnsRrIs4wj4ZMy8OSL4jpRk vbAg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AN3rC/6vt3qnxgRQMDRN2yO3rjzH5Rb0CpKKc+Hk37bPEB4ZqF7MlL5t et9OqvzrSreii5OdEKk=
X-Received: by 10.223.157.37 with SMTP id k37mr24317591wre.156.1492527298550; Tue, 18 Apr 2017 07:54:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.137.62] ([109.253.159.182]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t85sm15282981wmt.23.2017.04.18.07.54.56 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 18 Apr 2017 07:54:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: Yoav Nir <ynir.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <D6DA3121-3365-4409-9DF1-8B761608DA11@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_49A6AC1E-FEDF-4FBF-A4C9-C868158237B8"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 17:54:53 +0300
In-Reply-To: <7aba8a44-f1b8-b368-2b9a-91ad4bccfbcc@cisco.com>
Cc: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>, "mtgvenue@ietf.org" <mtgvenue@ietf.org>
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
References: <37de22dc-04a4-f868-698e-cf03cd791957@cisco.com> <5CF8C201-00C4-4E07-BAB6-8CC5A30B54F5@cooperw.in> <7aba8a44-f1b8-b368-2b9a-91ad4bccfbcc@cisco.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mtgvenue/h6YTgrasnx083zEl6_Jw61C3hLs>
Subject: Re: [Mtgvenue] Issue #21: unfiltered should be mandatory (was: Re: issue #3: Too many mandatory)
X-BeenThere: mtgvenue@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "List for email discussion of the IAOC meeting venue selection process." <mtgvenue.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mtgvenue>, <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mtgvenue/>
List-Post: <mailto:mtgvenue@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mtgvenue>, <mailto:mtgvenue-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2017 14:55:03 -0000

Hi, Eliot.

I don’t think I disagree with the conclusion, but I think some of the logic is flawed.

> On 18 Apr 2017, at 15:51, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> wrote:
> 
> Editor hat firmly off.
> Please see below.
> 
> On 4/6/17 5:37 PM, Alissa Cooper wrote:
>> The full text of this one is:
>> 
>> The Facility directly provides, or permits and facilitates, the delivery of a high performance, robust, unfiltered and unmodified IETF Network.
>> 
>> Personally I think this should be a mandatory criterion, i.e. we should not select a venue that cannot provide this. If this needs to reference the meeting network requirements document to provide the objective criteria by which it will be judged, that would be fine, I think.
>> 
> 
> I agree that this one should be Mandatory, and propose to make it so in the next version of the document.  My logic is as follows:
> It can generally be determined when a network is filtered, and so it's an easy criteria at least to provide an objective answer to.
We get to determine whether the network is filtered or not two days before the meeting starts. By then participants are in the city, in the air or packing. Measurement cannot affect venue selection. Only promises can.
> As a matter of course, people working at the IETF have to communicate with both their companies and their customers in confidence, and they could be anywhere.  In this sense, I don't think we can run a successful meeting without such unfettered access.
> We tend to eat our own dog food, and as such need necessary network access to conduct experiments.
Both of those points assume we need some kind of Internet access that others people on business travel don’t. European countries (not just the UK) are constantly toying with mandatory filtering to prevent copyright infringement, child pornography and hate speech. See the below links in no particular order. Countries in other parts of the world either filter more or plan to filter more.

Our use of the Internet is no different from that of any conference of doctors or insurance salespeople.

Yoav

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/01/26/porn-blocking-legislation-cement-internet-filtering-uk-law/ <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2017/01/26/porn-blocking-legislation-cement-internet-filtering-uk-law/>
https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/internet-filtering-trends-liberal-democracies-french-and-german-regulatory-debates <https://policyreview.info/articles/analysis/internet-filtering-trends-liberal-democracies-french-and-german-regulatory-debates>
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/eu-internet-advocates-launch-campaign-stop-eus-dangerous-copyright-filtering <https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2017/03/eu-internet-advocates-launch-campaign-stop-eus-dangerous-copyright-filtering>