Return-Path: X-Original-To: wgchairs@mail2.ietf.org Delivered-To: wgchairs@mail2.ietf.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7552EFC5AE25 for ; Sat, 6 Jun 2026 07:13:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1780755195; bh=Y4K+XtXxJm1Ziov6bMqvw8trv+/q74NDehSipAStwyY=; h=Reply-To:From:To:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:Date; b=s+V/3XP3DoY+Z9ci5SL4OzG392RKwevWDltAbOCLCpnpDUL1Vyi6cy+xRbdbsExPV OsAL/NAbvgPjTyR9mfrGGLtaniW8OpIMOj7CfMrFW86Bnryjui//s3tEDbAt1TEsx7 qujzKYD7/UdGjU3zypmukT0AsJqMr5RcXeMNJNgs= X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.796 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.796 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=olddog.co.uk Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Rq78Cww8Pq9w for ; Sat, 6 Jun 2026 07:13:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mta5.iomartmail.com (mta5.iomartmail.com [62.128.193.155]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-ECDSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 324CEFC5AABE for ; Sat, 6 Jun 2026 07:12:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vs2.iomartmail.com (vs2.iomartmail.com [10.12.10.123]) by mta5.iomartmail.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 656ECrmG025695; Sat, 6 Jun 2026 15:12:53 +0100 Received: from vs2.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 168F54604B; Sat, 6 Jun 2026 15:12:52 +0100 (BST) Received: from vs2.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00C6246048; Sat, 6 Jun 2026 15:12:52 +0100 (BST) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (unknown [10.12.10.248]) by vs2.iomartmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Sat, 6 Jun 2026 15:12:51 +0100 (BST) Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V (82-69-109-75.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk [82.69.109.75]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id 656ECpBS026933 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 6 Jun 2026 15:12:51 +0100 From: "Adrian Farrel" To: "'Mike Ounsworth'" , "'Rohan Mahy'" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: Participation using AI in WG mailing lists and github repos Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2026 15:12:51 +0100 Organization: Old Dog Consulting Message-ID: <153f01dcf5be$8fce5e10$af6b1a30$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_1540_01DCF5C6.F193D780" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Content-Language: en-gb Thread-Index: AQG4OfeczqyBT06LFAFHFlmNexEzSAInS04TtmnOeeA= X-Originating-IP: 82.69.109.75 X-Thinkmail-Auth: adrian@olddog.co.uk DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=olddog.co.uk; h=reply-to :from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id :mime-version:content-type; s=20221128; bh=Y4K+XtXxJm1Ziov6bMqvw 8trv+/q74NDehSipAStwyY=; b=Yo1bVL3ZhsQf93JDJNwL7jwi3+VqC2ig0KE17 jb+KeEdxDXGWtO1kwC77ZQw8FVKN/XcLbacjMpfN762Xtm/X3tg321/Bsrcllugn uhmp/W55kJu9toKah1ZqBOYRYatx0MoiwABAaInaqZ6Vk7PiP5EW7igzZEu/Kmm1 WskPBSQfpuXTL7cZvaZXY/Xfld9k+pzcYgSZjqJPJR1nETvopya5iNO7JznttxWr 6BDCED2yqrsNldF5o43qpXk/3+SqYbA4wIwnHLsRn6cmT11FmmV2XtElR6OiULg0 TC6ikZGwnOnt1Zf1e6F/oDoUXSJ/yiOSqt0Zf+DlBkSpgX4hA== X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-9.1.0.2090-9.0.0.1006-29464.005 X-TM-AS-Result: No--20.066-10.0-31-10 X-imss-scan-details: No--20.066-10.0-31-10 X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-9.1.0.2090-9.0.1006-29464.005 X-TMASE-Result: 10--20.066000-10.000000 X-TMASE-MatchedRID: Rp71wniPtoPDQW/tdTswLnFPUrVDm6jt9pLnYtQ99xJxNvWDwkxhwFiq Ayk7LkbkLuDp+bca78T2dmv/LObU58fR/z45YAnEQfSOYOlxKYvKLdLRjLKhpzxzAG47ocHfTsd +cH/F96om4nUHcG7gkKzGS2pe/ybcFDCN/1eC4ASHZXNSWjgdU0i8rgutezVpHf/TNef1Gv1wA0 jQRrGkEqnbOjmwLRMHMCNOyOhYFbs1t42aLIqJRq5i3jK3KDOoiRPU6vvejXLX1cRD6e4P5JIh2 sHJ3rY0PhG3C4bJ9uegvf9AEvJriCO58ILeu73w71Wx2uUbPLdDr8MVm6DK3Vti/oq364XY9Tva dhXG9g3gPqVbzYllURI1hOrFCZ+z/7PvFa8I/I/Mfp33SZvj4o5UafLmrvaGI9L0l0rdbj+0CAr hO1es/eAmO6TkjG+lDL6+XjCG+Z1A4VPFYKuhbwI6gMblpHUxo09MP0yScOgtvNfCaL2uAm1bBB San3/JDyKTxauHiUv+fmoCdpMrG6ogyC3+YGtoNmg1ckxsf6cl3afZehJEWV/TJVF6hUzt+H362 3+iWcbFUK95Ds2FwyxIxM/cKbPVDYy1ZRWzwF9G4E5n+LMUNJpAhsJYhaJrmyiLZetSf8mVHVxP 1hp9BUpZ1N/CwmPLef/FJcI/YUA/PrDFX06YfLDszp3K5gqDAqYBE3k9Mpw= X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-22:0,33:0,34:0-0 Message-ID-Hash: UK6TRMVRWI2KVOARSEZ3FZHEBPYN2U3H X-Message-ID-Hash: UK6TRMVRWI2KVOARSEZ3FZHEBPYN2U3H X-MailFrom: adrian@olddog.co.uk X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-wgchairs.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header CC: 'WG Chairs' X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Working Group Chairs Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_1540_01DCF5C6.F193D780 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-farrel-catalist-ai4all/ =20 Adrian =20 PS No intelligence was harmed in the production of this document =20 From: Mike Ounsworth =20 Sent: 06 June 2026 15:05 To: Rohan Mahy Cc: WG Chairs Subject: Re: Participation using AI in WG mailing lists and github repos =20 I am not aware of a policy -- I would support writing one -- fast. =20 My $0.02: AI is good, the IETF community is especially technical and = especially international and AI helps level the playing field where = native english-speakers have an advantage in WG participating. =20 That said, AI will amplify both the number and length of mailing list = messages. The thing with LLMs is that they write beautifully, even while = spouting total nonsense, so I also fear that once we start receiving = AI-written I-Ds, the review task of deciding whether a document is = properly thought-out architecturally, or whether it has subtle technical = bugs is going to become an order of magnitude harder. =20 Many open source orgs are starting to craft contributor policies that = you're allowed to make LLM-assisted contributions, but the contributor = has to declare them as such, and the PRs get a github tab "AI-assisted", = and they explicitly get lower review priority due to the higher expected = review effort. I would love to see the IETF develop a similar policy. =20 -Mike=20 =20 "Knowing is a barrier which prevents learning" -- Frank Herbert, Dune. =20 "An expert is a person who has found out by his own painful experience = all the mistakes that one can make in a very narrow field.=E2=80=9D -- = Niels Bohr =20 On Friday, June 5th, 2026 at 9:12 PM, Rohan Mahy > wrote: Hi, Do we have a policy that specifically mentions replying to WG mailing = lists and/or github repos with obviously AI-generated content of = questionable relevance? I know we have tools for managing people who are = disruptive, but the amplification using AI is more the issue here. The = account in question does have a human user.=20 =20 Thanks, -rohan =20 ------=_NextPart_000_1540_01DCF5C6.F193D780 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

h= ttps://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-farrel-catalist-ai4all/

 

Adrian

 

PS No intelligence was harmed in the production of this = document

 

From:<= /b> Mike = Ounsworth <mike=3D40ounsworth.ca@dmarc.ietf.org>
Sent: = 06 June 2026 15:05
To: Rohan Mahy = <rohan.mahy@gmail.com>
Cc: WG Chairs = <wgchairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Participation using AI = in WG mailing lists and github repos

 

I am not aware = of a policy -- I would support writing one -- = fast.

 

My $0.02: AI = is good, the IETF community is especially technical and especially = international and AI helps level the playing field where native = english-speakers have an advantage in WG = participating.

 

That said, AI = will amplify both the number and length of mailing list messages. The = thing with LLMs is that they write beautifully, even while spouting = total nonsense, so I also fear that once we start receiving AI-written = I-Ds, the review task of deciding whether a document is properly = thought-out architecturally, or whether it has subtle technical bugs is = going to become an order of magnitude = harder.

 

Many open = source orgs are starting to craft contributor policies that you're = allowed to make LLM-assisted contributions, but the contributor has to = declare them as such, and the PRs get a github tab = "AI-assisted", and they explicitly get lower review priority = due to the higher expected review effort. I would love to see the IETF = develop a similar policy.

 

-Mike 

 

"Knowing = is a barrier which prevents learning" -- Frank Herbert, = Dune.

 

&quo= t;An expert is a person who has found out by his own painful experience = all the mistakes that one can make in a very narrow field.=E2=80=9D -- = Niels Bohr

 

On Friday, June 5th, 2026 at 9:12 PM, = Rohan Mahy <rohan.mahy@gmail.com> = wrote:

Hi,

Do = we have a policy that specifically mentions replying to WG mailing lists = and/or github repos with obviously AI-generated content of questionable = relevance? I know we have tools for managing people who are disruptive, = but the amplification using AI is more the issue here. The account in = question does have a human user.

 

Thanks,

-rohan

 

------=_NextPart_000_1540_01DCF5C6.F193D780--