IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rfcplusplus] Sunk cost + not about us

Joseph Lorenzo Hall <joe@cdt.org> Wed, 11 July 2018 11:03 UTC

Return-Path: <jhall@cdt.org>
X-Original-To: rfcplusplus@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rfcplusplus@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D9544130DD0 for <rfcplusplus@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 04:03:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, 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 (1024-bit key) header.d=cdt.org
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 sGMAicwVvCDG for <rfcplusplus@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 04:03:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ua0-x22d.google.com (mail-ua0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400c:c08::22d]) (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 A20D2130DD1 for <rfcplusplus@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 04:03:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ua0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id x24-v6so15917108ual.10 for <rfcplusplus@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 04:03:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cdt.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=jFzMm5NCxgrgnW7CvN+4zNnKr+/kzAYo1tpx9YDDexI=; b=JSURy9xDteeD6Q9tU/GSj9W3S7Khfqqcd+SDUYeJv0vUK0iFsyLnjry+UyzEy1fGMq Aas9YhGxiFwcH6mWeFH9ZUnpk56uMukH+c51DQqizJn8NefOi8ATmCR4m1PzDUtLNHm5 JBt0fU7jrQSn2NjtYwlyQt2Nq4gwfbPZZV+5I=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=jFzMm5NCxgrgnW7CvN+4zNnKr+/kzAYo1tpx9YDDexI=; b=TMk/EQ5/y4Tz7qQl0MEBtFLVqgiX6YQXCjizO7yxT2lkxF2sdBw+VVHqfdPYjueDIl evMpPXEQk1XV7nk5VnZ89J1U+pKqL43QWgtDoUcKdFunGrjBTxoX7iqeNhLig16szazz pyecR4gXuq2C5qGfI5N2JFhgbGEh2sZ8Zbd+Ef4bqiw6Kd66QasX74c6M3ZokS7BD/gM Olr6xTKoMpBg7FduTmoexHHjntSAfPI4OuikP0X1T1A490tRf0qCNlWi00vue3LmWuv9 t3ROL7ovso2l+I6dIiX5phzz4ZX+3Yd0PY1p4Kgzg0XB849lh09Jn5O0Io1IqSsAUk14 TapA==
X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E00nzgP8ppjSyddyik+8Ks0W35L64V1QN0EUuKkcU8aBaomE0oq dGxohCOSJthXW2+xb5OslVtl5XoOESm+R+z/zVL/LAv0
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpevpDa8Mv5HN83B0fnBKViH6fHguUWI0E4xJmP0undq8m7uAgI9IWnYRGJ3HHlpaSB9Q5U8uzTj4Bn7k5G43SM=
X-Received: by 2002:ab0:15ea:: with SMTP id j39-v6mr17718529uae.96.1531306981088; Wed, 11 Jul 2018 04:03:01 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAL02cgQbT8s0493SdbM7Gbw2ZiSV1kMHk+6=Z4BdC2Ky664CNg@mail.gmail.com> <d159dd1f-de0b-d6c5-6430-cd5577e266fd@joelhalpern.com> <CAL02cgSoRyRaR+_s3jne=2593f_mtntm-v7Nn=5rDs1_r96pfQ@mail.gmail.com> <639B8766-A030-490D-8431-C3F9F3EAFCB4@gmail.com> <CAL02cgQQPcoaQqz5XiUYH7DeUvBM617ZjxTVtrEJ68yEwz0pcg@mail.gmail.com> <8B48E5E5-90DC-423F-83C7-9B51A853A1A8@gmail.com> <CABtrr-WFzgor3s9R=VZ1HG9Vkgj4=khDfpFH3OkV3zxd17oLVA@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20180711011740.0c7449a8@elandnews.com>
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20180711011740.0c7449a8@elandnews.com>
From: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <joe@cdt.org>
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 07:02:50 -0400
Message-ID: <CABtrr-VhMbE0zSYApvxpZyGyTQK9UevLMbH31HegXdeBSuCHdw@mail.gmail.com>
To: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
Cc: rfcplusplus@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a673b30570b730b0"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfcplusplus/zjSy4Qyf0I8ObizdvQRJovBn_OE>
Subject: Re: [Rfcplusplus] Sunk cost + not about us
X-BeenThere: rfcplusplus@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: For discussion of the RFC++ BoF proposal and related ideas <rfcplusplus.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rfcplusplus>, <mailto:rfcplusplus-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rfcplusplus/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfcplusplus@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfcplusplus-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rfcplusplus>, <mailto:rfcplusplus-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2018 11:03:05 -0000

On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 04:32 S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> wrote:

> Hi Joseph,
> At 03:05 PM 10-07-2018, Joseph Lorenzo Hall wrote:
> >However, the document series still baffles me, and I know a lot of
> >folks that squint at IETF and don't understand any of the
> >distinctions we do (I would have answered the survey question as
> >there being only 4 document series). Alissa had the unenviable task
> >at one point of sitting me down and telling me the difference
> >between and ID and RFC, even after I had thoroughly read the Tao and
> >been to a couple IETFs. (The ID we've been working on for a while I
> >even named (incorrectly) when setting up a github repository as an
> >RFC: https://github.com/josephlhall/rfc-censorship-tech ).
>
> The IETF changed its position on Internet-Drafts a few years
> ago.  There are cases where Internet-Drafts have been referenced as RFCs.
>
> As an off-topic comment, the repository states that the discussions
> of the work occurs on the censorship working group mailing list.  I
> could not find that IETF working group.


There is certainly no WG for that; I suspect a typo or relic of the
template used.

> --
Joseph Lorenzo Hall
Chief Technologist, Center for Democracy & Technology [https://www.cdt.org]
1401 K ST NW STE 200, Washington DC 20005-3497
e: joe@cdt.org, p: 202.407.8825, pgp: https://josephhall.org/gpg-key
Fingerprint: 3CA2 8D7B 9F6D DBD3 4B10  1607 5F86 6987 40A9 A871

v2.39.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status