Re: [TLS] TLS@IETF101 Agenda Posted

Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com> Thu, 15 March 2018 03:09 UTC

Return-Path: <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: tls@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 820E7127078 for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Mar 2018 20:09:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.698
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.698 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 iHpkszNMxn1v for <tls@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Mar 2018 20:09:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qk0-x22b.google.com (mail-qk0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::22b]) (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 0DB7212D82F for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Mar 2018 20:09:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qk0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id b198so5853067qkg.9 for <tls@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Mar 2018 20:09:41 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=+F1mZwa80zqvQ6Wx8H6aMO69KodUXq7O2gF/ZAe42B0=; b=EBNMdXi6m0gTG8ulPMbO+kLt0DIZgHrwqE5DVBFSx9Auq4AkUim6WIjDP+243JN/sA aqLCda5COuDZMiuwCfYz6n4/j/DKB3p15smSJqTcSxQqN6g7WotqWP6Q3OQN2WACpIqY LGFVEUvovKZ9pJkTR77sXbXxVRu6y5bUJt5Tl/hGMvSBnj1kBCCw+S0g1TXqAniSIpa7 h8zaVLYmG36aIAm/qEBOQHVVryeaWj8xnC3wva+6PiU4D2Y2GmjzUty+zTab+czQATRV wDANuHn7/KexbYz7/v5sItnl5DSNUsKd78Vun11AlJSQek6YtAVveqOAY4kCUr2Y3QJ1 ywCQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=+F1mZwa80zqvQ6Wx8H6aMO69KodUXq7O2gF/ZAe42B0=; b=q45TMQcZ9uCwyG+ZnRZ6sEpwz9tK9L+jjs1Eq0VjKitmlxhgN1MbBRlO/Garm3IbgL AGwu4Z0uSAOhAD8QqS0LvwghibcZ6H1Ld/3PPT/1bXN26xdIrc+O1vLn54tKfnd9mpw0 /9NBu83MEMbvzwTatDP0pg5XDyqSudQs8OLETrdE0SPcEEBOcWeGPZd/uoYDFb0BqWPT MQSJQ+e+Ks4z8QSAPDyw6jNBNf6MscfzJ1QbvECimX/yfruEIxY83QDAhEmlYHgr7h1E UAm1SY8mCSqOnQSPve8FYCnuz5GuyQgh/CVzGh9GEhW3h4KkB3M2gA+IR0Iedos5Mzkx UQUg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7HM5wdGcZ5t2W9iQ9OT/yuLAhsrJI2JmKP5/rzf/k5tfbZ5BnMJ XOnNRuqWaSBPhevLDWq4ay0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELsiPSpDtd2xD2N2y5sSTZe/oVap3wZkoeu36184H04goj4+sV2NdK7K5r9hD2ZVYttBQkCq0g==
X-Received: by 10.55.138.135 with SMTP id m129mr10113146qkd.59.1521083379221; Wed, 14 Mar 2018 20:09:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:18f:800:d4e:950b:fb56:dbce:d669? ([2601:18f:800:d4e:950b:fb56:dbce:d669]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x8sm3173573qta.64.2018.03.14.20.09.38 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 14 Mar 2018 20:09:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <F214ED52-962C-413E-AA1C-10257A7470ED@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_A6BBF75E-D448-432A-A02E-17C62BE4FD36"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.2 \(3445.5.20\))
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2018 23:09:37 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CALZ3u+Z-1uOANqkxGRY=iVNSHM_Yy-kthPB16rXpPLJxpJy1aA@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: "<tls@ietf.org>" <tls@ietf.org>, Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>, Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
To: Artyom Gavrichenkov <ximaera@gmail.com>
References: <6140B7A6-A1C7-44BC-9C65-9BE0D5E1B580@sn3rd.com> <986797a7-81b0-7874-5f39-afe83c86635b@cs.tcd.ie> <CAOgPGoBYc7O+qmjM-ptkRkE6mRsOYgc5O7Wu9pm3drFp3TVa6Q@mail.gmail.com> <d7dfdc1a-2c96-fd88-df1b-3167fe0f804b@cs.tcd.ie> <CAHbuEH7E8MhFcMt2GSngSrGxN=6bU6LD49foPC-mdoUZboH_0Q@mail.gmail.com> <1a024320-c674-6f75-ccc4-d27b75e3d017@nomountain.net> <2ed0gc.p5dcxd.31eoyz-qmf@mercury.scss.tcd.ie> <d7ec110f-2a0b-cf97-94a3-eeb5594d8c24@cs.tcd.ie> <CAOgPGoDpreyWcaLG_bMvEmMk1KvMQEGhXB+Ro+f1BKf3p_DxOA@mail.gmail.com> <4e1ab8ca-e977-7273-358b-3df3670d0ee5@cs.tcd.ie> <D1FFA72D-28B8-4435-B069-5EE1563E26B2@fugue.com> <CALZ3u+Z6DWMwKF6eoDJ2h5ABRGpeYrqZUyesnYhHP5g1d8rQ1Q@mail.gmail.com> <9BBDCA0E-7D64-4461-A00F-9F0BC567D471@gmail.com> <CALZ3u+Z-1uOANqkxGRY=iVNSHM_Yy-kthPB16rXpPLJxpJy1aA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/tls/bjDba2yxOswHsHuDbCMUdN2J7DE>
Subject: Re: [TLS] TLS@IETF101 Agenda Posted
X-BeenThere: tls@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is the mailing list for the Transport Layer Security working group of the IETF." <tls.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/tls/>
List-Post: <mailto:tls@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls>, <mailto:tls-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2018 03:09:42 -0000


> On Mar 14, 2018, at 10:52 PM, Artyom Gavrichenkov <ximaera@gmail.com>; wrote:
> 
> 14 Mar. 2018 г., 22:32 Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com <mailto:rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>>:
> 
>> On Mar 13, 2018, at 7:45 PM, Artyom Gavrichenkov <ximaera@gmail.com <mailto:ximaera@gmail.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> 13 Mar. 2018 г., 18:38 Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com <mailto:mellon@fugue.com>>:
>> One strategy that's very effective for overcoming resistance to bad ideas is to keep pushing the idea until nobody who's resisting it can afford to continue doing so.
>> 
>> There's a name for that tactics, it's called "consensus by exhaustion". (On the recent GNSO meeting this was briefly discussed as an issue within ICANN.)
> 
> And there is a name for this sort of labeling - it's called an "ad hominem attack".  I don't believe anyone is employing "consensus by exhaustion".  Please don't attach unwarranted labels to honest attempts to explain requirements and develop solutions.
> 
> I didn't! Ted has just pointed out that there's some strategy which is by the way effective under some circumstances, and I've just recalled it has a name. No labels attached!

Ah, OK, sorry for the incorrect inference!

In my opinion some people may be misreading a good faith effort to explain the problem, listen to feedback and develop a solution as pushing an idea until the opponents can't afford to keep participating.  Please accept that good faith effort at face value...

- Ralph