Re: [Shutup] Proposed Charter for something

Dave Crocker <> Mon, 07 December 2015 04:34 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94FA61B2DCC; Sun, 6 Dec 2015 20:34:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5048Ymr-Vj4r; Sun, 6 Dec 2015 20:34:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 754521B2DCB; Sun, 6 Dec 2015 20:34:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ( []) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id tB74Yl3n024580 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 6 Dec 2015 20:34:48 -0800
References: <20151207023426.54934.qmail@ary.lan> <>
To: Ted Lemon <>
From: Dave Crocker <>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Message-ID: <>
Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2015 20:35:13 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 ( []); Sun, 06 Dec 2015 20:34:48 -0800 (PST)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Shutup] Proposed Charter for something
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: SMTP Headers Unhealthy To User Privacy <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2015 04:34:50 -0000

On 12/6/2015 7:44 PM, Ted Lemon wrote:
> Agreed, but I don't see why you think this is an RG and not a WG.

Please re-read his note and one or another of my earlier notes.  They
explain why.

At the moment, proposals for taking specific actions represent a random
walk down a large and complex set of possibilities, with no serious
analysis of benefits, risks, likelihoods or anything other than intuition.

Before modifying infrastructure operations of a critical Internet
resource, perhaps we should develop some credible basis for taking any
specific action?

Individuals are free to take whatever random path strikes their whimsy.
 Standards groups should have rather more basis for moving the whole
ship in a particular direction.

Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking