IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rfc-i] "community" for the RFC series

Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> Fri, 04 October 2019 21:39 UTC

Return-Path: <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E9C1120045 for <ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 14:39:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.951
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.951 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, MAILING_LIST_MULTI=-1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 ETM_XrobnsLv for <ietfarch-rfc-interest-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 14:39:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfc-editor.org (rfc-editor.org [4.31.198.49]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9092D1201CE for <rfc-interest-archive-eekabaiReiB1@ietf.org>; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 14:39:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rfcpa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CFB8B81FEA; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 14:39:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Original-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Delivered-To: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 439B5B81FEA for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 14:39:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rfc-editor.org
Received: from rfc-editor.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rfcpa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kKPcjve2fzyh for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 14:38:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ran.psg.com (ran.psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:8006::18]) by rfc-editor.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E496B81FDA for <rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>; Fri, 4 Oct 2019 14:38:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=ryuu.rg.net) by ran.psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <randy@psg.com>) id 1iGVHT-0004Ov-TN; Fri, 04 Oct 2019 21:38:32 +0000
Date: Fri, 04 Oct 2019 14:38:30 -0700
Message-ID: <m2v9t42nu1.wl-randy@psg.com>
From: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <21c43d80-0e0b-4ee8-2cf6-232eb9b66f01@gmail.com>
References: <394203C8F4EF044AA616736F@PSB> <4097464f-d038-2439-5ca5-70bac46b25ea@huitema.net> <69DAA6BBBE243BAD98926154@PSB> <750a842a-b527-82b9-e8b8-1d23fdc5cc72@cs.tcd.ie> <31b3720b-c8f1-3964-ae30-ce391007b3aa@gmail.com> <120cf3cb-31a6-7cc9-d6e3-7daee0f9d11d@cs.tcd.ie> <21c43d80-0e0b-4ee8-2cf6-232eb9b66f01@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) Emacs/26.2 Mule/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI-EPG 1.14.7 - "Harue")
Subject: Re: [rfc-i] "community" for the RFC series
X-BeenThere: rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "A list for discussion of the RFC series and RFC Editor functions." <rfc-interest.rfc-editor.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/options/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.rfc-editor.org/pipermail/rfc-interest/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest>, <mailto:rfc-interest-request@rfc-editor.org?subject=subscribe>
Cc: IETF <ietf@ietf.org>, rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org, iab@iab.org, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org
Sender: rfc-interest <rfc-interest-bounces@rfc-editor.org>

> I don't think there's any point in trying to define it precisely;
> we just have to recognise that it's not just "us" for any
> reasonable definition of "us", so we have a broad responsibility.

and we should have the honesty and the humility not to put words in
the mouths of those neither present nor having the floor to speak for
themselves.

randy
_______________________________________________
rfc-interest mailing list
rfc-interest@rfc-editor.org
https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email