Re: [SCITT] [EXTERNAL] Re: Slide Deck.

[Michael McBride <[e-mail]>]

That's a good point.

We participate in the IETF as individuals and yet we still put our affiliation (if any) on drafts. And we announce name and affiliation at the mic in meetings. Why? Likely to help us gauge operator vs vendor opinion. It may seem inconsistent because we don't (or shouldn't) base consensus on affiliation. Companies don't pay to participate in the ietf. And, as Eliot states, its counter cultural to call out companies especially to sway opinions.

mike

From: Dick Brooks <[e-mail]>
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2022 7:02 AM
To: 'Eliot Lear' <[e-mail]>; 'Robert Martin' <[e-mail]>
Cc: [e-mail]; 'Cedric Fournet' <fournet=[e-mail]>; 'Orie Steele' <[e-mail]>; 'Kay Williams' <kayw=[e-mail]>; Michael McBride <[e-mail]>; 'Hannes Tschofenig' <[e-mail]>; 'Birkholz, Henk' <[e-mail]>
Subject: RE: [SCITT] [EXTERNAL] Re: Slide Deck.

Eliot,

I don't want to come off as combative but I see no evidence of this assertion in the materials posted by the IETF:

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                        S. Bradner
Request for Comments: 8179                            Harvard University
BCP: 79                                                     J. Contreras
Obsoletes: 3979, 4879                                 University of Utah
Updates: 2026                                                   May 2017
Category: Best Current Practice
ISSN: 2070-1721


Network Working Group                                            E. Lear
Internet-Draft                                             Cisco Systems
Updates: 8520 (if approved)                                   C. Bormann
Intended status: Standards Track                  Universität Bremen TZI
Expires: 26 October 2022                                   24 April 2022


               Ownership and licensing statements in YANG
                        draft-ietf-opsawg-ol-01
Network Working Group                                          J. Postel
Request for Comments: 1818                                           ISI
BCP: 1                                                             T. Li
Category: Best Current Practice                            cisco Systems
                                                              Y. Rekhter
                                                           cisco Systems
                                                             August 1995


                         Best Current Practices

I personally worked on the work group that created RFC 1767:
Network Working Group                                         D. Crocker
Request for Comments: 1767                        Brandenburg Consulting
Category: Standards Track                                     March 1995


                   MIME Encapsulation of EDI Objects

Thanks,

Dick Brooks
[cid:image001.png@01D89D21.D0E54E80]  [cid:image002.png@01D89D21.D0E54E80]
Active Member of the CISA Critical Manufacturing Sector,
Sector Coordinating Council - A Public-Private Partnership

Never trust software, always verify and report!<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Freliableenergyanalytics.com%2Fproducts&data=05%7C01%7Cmichael.mcbride%40futurewei.com%7C8fa0eacdeb9d4e5be73608da6b2187f5%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637940089022179705%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=GJhzXav%2BA3kSGRNIxQFUZQmzrBOmPsbGp1SHm3c2%2BaY%3D&reserved=0> (tm)
http://www.reliableenergyanalytics.com<https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reliableenergyanalytics.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cmichael.mcbride%40futurewei.com%7C8fa0eacdeb9d4e5be73608da6b2187f5%7C0fee8ff2a3b240189c753a1d5591fedc%7C1%7C0%7C637940089022179705%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=cGPA54foDMT%2FkMEePko9VV%2BF%2FA6Vzxg4P3ZylX%2FC1yo%3D&reserved=0>
Email: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>
Tel: [phone]

From: Eliot Lear <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2022 9:49 AM
To: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; 'Robert Martin' <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Cc: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>; 'Cedric Fournet' <fournet=[e-mail]<mailto:fournet=[e-mail]>>; 'Orie Steele' <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; 'Kay Williams' <kayw=[e-mail]<mailto:kayw=[e-mail]>>; 'Michael McBride' <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; 'Hannes Tschofenig' <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>; 'Birkholz, Henk' <[e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>>
Subject: Re: [SCITT] [EXTERNAL] Re: Slide Deck.


Hi Dick,
On 21.07.22 15:22, Dick Brooks wrote:
Eliot,

I have no doubt that your concerns are valid, as it pertains to the views of the Area Director and the approval to charter a workgroup.

It's not just the area director.  It is entirely counter-cultural to name companies at the IETF.*  We participate as individuals.  It just rubs people the wrong way.  Why unnecessarily create that friction?

Eliot

* It is not counter-cultural to name implementations, especially when talking about interoperability issues, or when one is using an example.