Re: [openpgp] How to re-launch the OpenPGP WG

Derek Atkins <derek@ihtfp.com> Thu, 02 April 2015 14:53 UTC

Return-Path: <derek@ihtfp.com>
X-Original-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 401C11B2CC6 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Apr 2015 07:53:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.61
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.61 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611] 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 wVEMZSjDAwF0 for <openpgp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 2 Apr 2015 07:53:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail2.ihtfp.org (MAIL2.IHTFP.ORG [204.107.200.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 239CF1B2CC4 for <openpgp@ietf.org>; Thu, 2 Apr 2015 07:53:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ihtfp.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 028F7E2039; Thu, 2 Apr 2015 10:53:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mail2.ihtfp.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail2.ihtfp.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 29691-05; Thu, 2 Apr 2015 10:53:15 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from securerf.ihtfp.org (unknown [IPv6:fe80::ea2a:eaff:fe7d:235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mocana.ihtfp.org", Issuer "IHTFP Consulting Certification Authority" (verified OK)) by mail2.ihtfp.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 36C0DE2038; Thu, 2 Apr 2015 10:53:15 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from warlord@localhost) by securerf.ihtfp.org (8.14.8/8.14.8/Submit) id t32ErETk026937; Thu, 2 Apr 2015 10:53:14 -0400
From: Derek Atkins <derek@ihtfp.com>
To: Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo@scientia.net>
References: <878uf2iehi.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <5510C26E.7070409@iang.org> <87mw32omzs.fsf@vigenere.g10code.de> <55134455.2070606@iang.org> <1427415236.24976.13.camel@scientia.net>
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2015 10:53:13 -0400
In-Reply-To: <1427415236.24976.13.camel@scientia.net> (Christoph Anton Mitterer's message of "Fri, 27 Mar 2015 01:13:56 +0100")
Message-ID: <sjmr3s2inty.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.2a
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/openpgp/7XnANrjzhFFOM0EfZdcA8UQxDbM>
Cc: openpgp@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [openpgp] How to re-launch the OpenPGP WG
X-BeenThere: openpgp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Ongoing discussion of OpenPGP issues." <openpgp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/openpgp>, <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/openpgp/>
List-Post: <mailto:openpgp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp>, <mailto:openpgp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2015 14:53:25 -0000

Christoph Anton Mitterer <calestyo@scientia.net> writes:

> On Wed, 2015-03-25 at 23:27 +0000, ianG wrote: 
>> Here's my big criticism of the IETF process:  like all processes it 
>> eventually ends up becoming a place for people to create silos of 
>> knowledge and careers, and eventually divorces itself from what's 
>> happening out there in the real world.  But it holds the keys to some 
>> powerful Internet protocol components, and while it's not bringing in 
>> the new, outside knowledge, the IETF WG becomes the blockage, the inner 
>> sanctum, the guilds that the IETF swore to bring down.
>> 
>> So what do we do?  Leave?  Stay?  Fight?
> So do you have any better proposal idea?
>
> Anything more governmental (ISO, national standardisation bodies) or
> more commercial (ECMA) would IMHO be quite bad (since they're all known
> to be rather on the dark side of the force, and while they may have
> cookies, it's probably not what we should want).
>
> Not much is left the in the free/community world.... W3? Far too much in
> committee mode either, far to easily influenced by big players (see the
> whole HTML5 DRM stuff).
>
> Doing it independently... doesn't seem appealing either.
>
>
> I'd say IETF is quite the right place.

For now there's nothing that says we *NEED* an official working group.
Although having one would make the process easier.

> Cheers,
> Chris.

-derek

-- 
       Derek Atkins                 617-623-3745
       derek@ihtfp.com             www.ihtfp.com
       Computer and Internet Security Consultant