From nobody Wed Jul 1 16:51:57 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C0123A1207; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 16:51:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 I151WMGP0x9U; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 16:51:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pg1-x529.google.com (mail-pg1-x529.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::529]) (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 342ED3A1204; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 16:51:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x529.google.com with SMTP id d4so12518613pgk.4; Wed, 01 Jul 2020 16:51:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:references:to:from:cc:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=aLGYXo6K5Rwrrt66gNKnNj8ERPSpH4G4gKuZTPRYqj0=; b=kpSuP5SazDov0ncfJJeX0h6MXLLR/L+l7kx3ZndjunwdmrHuuLLXQ7hu9R9I4NdvRD GlCSnzUFHUBsSMWPItaXfh1I1t4T/EfXG6wvsBXh3mOQusDkPUrRkzKAVoMyk7wVLUE1 FSmMivz0Y5Q2duhfGZK/mMbQCdSHVoWZCfmxMRov59KqQol+O+qA4P6UpetVUse9b1eN bLz/SY0QuChf4UpDByuk9K0w2yIKjxFKlrfhGOtPJXyuMN+96u4crziO0IizdLbWKtP3 hHMCU9X3S+G9pbKhigtBw5D/IQ0YWYySxqEG4c3rmch6Weorm1Vv0F7STnCTgUbZhrkP IL1Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:references:to:from:cc:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=aLGYXo6K5Rwrrt66gNKnNj8ERPSpH4G4gKuZTPRYqj0=; b=Bww3F+sTxotyO5erke2PT8piMCWgPKb6AbF+Kh6etdQQQUE9oQo2sz0cFYSkatuQGr wkuycrLYZIdtzvIcRY213Zo7q/28HcH/M7yIN2L6pFZbU3zyKdblodn0CrsH9JMrZ0gd rEW/Y4P90VLO9Ctn6TdZWEjKhtoMhBiaUdJgCHdfowcF9n81/d93ZA6ulbgtT5oPbvSI 8j4VIQaVxuRwZ+Z2OgNS9+F3advjLvRmhU6jz4inQMINggrMAvc63fNrbP/Nc9siiHij ccwvTwXEe97hhzA99zUJk9kRQjyMWVgAcYc4tPgOym3rG2s80FEpa8J29amnZaUCVjRz f7dw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531IfYALldEKRYdl718qR7fPKrVboH6nXybdqfzAplRlQklOymRL rW3h4uIzSsaThRb4cCX4hG2LoOdo X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxfzALNwsXyWqB7t/9EaBmWtG3Svc3mOvK9DoDpKUC/x6ODkjukSZco4zGx8kD9Ze8SKpKZWg== X-Received: by 2002:a65:4209:: with SMTP id c9mr22192612pgq.445.1593647511416; Wed, 01 Jul 2020 16:51:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] (102.124.69.111.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [111.69.124.102]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b4sm6113379pjn.38.2020.07.01.16.51.49 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 01 Jul 2020 16:51:50 -0700 (PDT) References: <159364689983.18657.6862006191914858465@ietfa.amsl.com> To: eligibility-discuss@ietf.org From: Brian E Carpenter Cc: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <159364689983.18657.6862006191914858465@ietfa.amsl.com> Message-ID: Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2020 11:51:46 +1200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <159364689983.18657.6862006191914858465@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: [Gendispatch] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2020 23:51:55 -0000 Hi, Anticipating some discussion at the next GENDISPATCH meeting, we've updated the draft according to various comments received, and with actual data included. Discusion on eligibility-discuss@ietf.org please. I strongly recommend the HTML version: https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03.html so that you can enjoy the Venn diagrams in-line. Many thanks to Robert Sparks for taking over that data analysis. (I'm now the world's leading expert on including OpenOffice .odp figures in xml2rfcv3 documents. I don't recommend it unless you enjoy manually editing SVG files.) Brian -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03.txt Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2020 16:41:39 -0700 From: internet-drafts@ietf.org Reply-To: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : Additional Criteria for Nominating Committee Eligibility Authors : Brian E. Carpenter Stephen Farrell Filename : draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03.txt Pages : 6 Date : 2020-07-01 Abstract: This document defines a process experiment under RFC 3933 that temporarily updates the criteria for qualifying volunteers to participate in the IETF Nominating Committee. It therefore also updates the criteria for qualifying signatories to a community recall petition. The purpose is to make the criteria more flexible in view of increasing remote participation in the IETF and a probable decline in face-to-face meetings. This document temporarily varies the rules in RFC 8713. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand/ There are also htmlized versions available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03 https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ _______________________________________________ I-D-Announce mailing list I-D-Announce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt From nobody Wed Jul 1 17:01:40 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C77383A1222; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 17:01:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.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 ZZKO70HbcRmO; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 17:01:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailb2.tigertech.net (mailb2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.154]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 586AA3A1218; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 17:01:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49xytn1sRkz1p5lX; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 17:01:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1593648097; bh=wylIZrhhxIzgsKSXilCAAAxTow/GO6lmKFOwKc1334E=; h=Subject:To:Cc:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=BLhpn6Oe7xXeyFPG/OYYvTsf5PHHiR/xfjH+btZGUl3GmZMf8FboFZaS2Mj81WBzf OiGla/cILD8ET9yh6cI+35h5Ku6fRAEVAUgNZFrjT1WM3qMZ7lg4sjjERTcMQLx0tB 8kX/bF1qOiIfG2NzkCHZbFSYpEj9sWWH3Ckdqw8M= X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at b2.tigertech.net Received: from [192.168.128.43] (209-255-163-147.ip.mcleodusa.net [209.255.163.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 49xytm4lSkz1p5kV; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 17:01:36 -0700 (PDT) To: Brian E Carpenter , eligibility-discuss@ietf.org Cc: gendispatch@ietf.org References: <159364689983.18657.6862006191914858465@ietfa.amsl.com> From: "Joel M. Halpern" Message-ID: <07c077e1-abd3-58a1-85d3-f914c450b19e@joelhalpern.com> Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2020 20:01:36 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2020 00:01:39 -0000 I think that the following is a corner case that we can probably ignore, but I want to make sure we do so deliberately rather than by accident. This is relative to path 5, draft authorship qualification. On some topics, in some working groups, I see a number of drafts with very large numbers of authors. These are not generally trimmed until late in the process. Some of those authors do not participate in any WG email list discussions, presumably did participate in supporting discussions, and may or may not have written a word of text. I do not see any sensible way to sort out those folks who are participating form those who aren't. I am guessing we can live with that. Yours, Joel On 7/1/2020 7:51 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > Hi, > > Anticipating some discussion at the next GENDISPATCH meeting, we've updated the draft according to various comments received, and with actual data included. Discusion on eligibility-discuss@ietf.org please. > > I strongly recommend the HTML version: > https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03.html > so that you can enjoy the Venn diagrams in-line. Many thanks to Robert Sparks for taking over that data analysis. > > (I'm now the world's leading expert on including OpenOffice .odp figures in xml2rfcv3 documents. I don't recommend it unless you enjoy manually editing SVG files.) > > Brian > > > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > Subject: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03.txt > Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2020 16:41:39 -0700 > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > Reply-To: internet-drafts@ietf.org > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. > > > Title : Additional Criteria for Nominating Committee Eligibility > Authors : Brian E. Carpenter > Stephen Farrell > Filename : draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03.txt > Pages : 6 > Date : 2020-07-01 > > Abstract: > This document defines a process experiment under RFC 3933 that > temporarily updates the criteria for qualifying volunteers to > participate in the IETF Nominating Committee. It therefore also > updates the criteria for qualifying signatories to a community recall > petition. The purpose is to make the criteria more flexible in view > of increasing remote participation in the IETF and a probable decline > in face-to-face meetings. This document temporarily varies the rules > in RFC 8713. > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand/ > > There are also htmlized versions available at: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03 > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03 > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > > _______________________________________________ > I-D-Announce mailing list > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > From nobody Wed Jul 1 18:04:18 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 754703A12C1 for ; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 18:04:13 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 hapSw3eVvEeU for ; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 18:04:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qv1-xf34.google.com (mail-qv1-xf34.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f34]) (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 2E1013A12C0 for ; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 18:04:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qv1-xf34.google.com with SMTP id m9so11945982qvx.5 for ; Wed, 01 Jul 2020 18:04:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=LYWX8HjMRIgyaIL6pvwCRoRV+CgxlnFOCkNg8UeMYSw=; b=fHF2oIUQfrPLOm1EXB8q8hJfU8zVhJJErf4x6hsl+CDgVHL1YzT/Ww5qpirak4gKCW 9cfCVsKw6+eYMd9jf0XHz214FbMS49RW+Cu0LW3UgHfOdrOqwggSIZUryb2SaJq8WVAe WT7pzgBB96wAB+L2j7hDQgHPZdTdKLrnt0gW2PG0lULi9+qWA5a/eEHr/htXGNaJ1KRa Pm90Ya2qmI7x52RUL08L1BPRuW0WQ8S1peSkl1NHewJqP5P84pYUk6oxYHzHH7JycFsi VHMRJTqg1A0h30I4kkOzFOj+frkevjzcap02aRTT4/2aSeeIrXlaQj6Rw+SWQydigc6t yIFw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=LYWX8HjMRIgyaIL6pvwCRoRV+CgxlnFOCkNg8UeMYSw=; b=YxZLom2XT2X8OqcNQRVbsluca0MUHoYvG6aJDfZ1azRiRB3RUL3VfH8N+kVE40lgEi mTmJBP63HZSwqFSTsP2oUln1wDzuPQJdZwh9wRYY9+NSS3rHNRkeIBUpaSYjcJ4FR8yo Ev9N+CRyr1KX9eFH9ALmPGMPPcqhoeOKb72+aeLPTGTPwC4c3hdbLIIpV1n9lW7mJ2cS 5c3g0WuJV7hhPdYGvH0otB1UfAVUQugo+r4pJmsMfSGnQrFavtdfW71vhqmteykVznoV f9Q5rw/mg8lPE4f9Y5tWlzPeDp2WPoINNQimpIFbOBjVkf7eVQeHVbnVDOnoW/f2QOPv CEvA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533S5DfJY2DzMzqyzfsNYjJLQUQZ7gt76Jg4owQb5RUpNhXosqLv aOAZhqG0z0aehfZvWFnTYPOaSg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzBxBwynR091yq5ldgXl6LYliwhzHMkJfQ6UbQyICKSv13bv7Itgaop3boZuaEpF4DneD1nOg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:18f2:: with SMTP id ep18mr16675147qvb.96.1593651851120; Wed, 01 Jul 2020 18:04:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2601:18b:300:36ee:c093:e6ce:b3b:84c8? ([2601:18b:300:36ee:c093:e6ce:b3b:84c8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m7sm7144615qti.6.2020.07.01.18.04.10 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 01 Jul 2020 18:04:10 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Ted Lemon Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2020 21:04:09 -0400 Message-Id: <6031AC74-AA24-466F-A558-1465B6372270@fugue.com> References: <07c077e1-abd3-58a1-85d3-f914c450b19e@joelhalpern.com> Cc: Brian E Carpenter , eligibility-discuss@ietf.org, gendispatch@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <07c077e1-abd3-58a1-85d3-f914c450b19e@joelhalpern.com> To: "Joel M. Halpern" X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18A5301v) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] [Eligibility-discuss] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2020 01:04:14 -0000 On Jul 1, 2020, at 20:01, Joel M. Halpern wrote: >=20 > I do not see any sensible way to sort out those folks who are participatin= g form those who aren't. I am guessing we can live with that. We are only ever going to be able to approximate.=20= From nobody Wed Jul 1 18:10:59 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56F7B3A12CD; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 18:10:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 WLbp816IBKYS; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 18:10:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lj1-x235.google.com (mail-lj1-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::235]) (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 AEFDE3A12CC; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 18:10:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x235.google.com with SMTP id b25so25905383ljp.6; Wed, 01 Jul 2020 18:10:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=lt7TV3fXxmTrHy09O+P0XgA0ICzi0Odp54zWqWsxEC8=; b=Z8h3SMpvmQAXcPdZx8PnMnmIz7Os9nnA3INHzrHnvD50LL9v4s3+jif6vpLOaJIl+9 HudbU1aqhGAlWf22ZwEpQrnL6Cn/4XoJsfLwe0ICZCXdEmnQP5WbspIQoqoCjJDGkmyu 4VdyfFMyrFg9Rp8SnTjwf0on5frVptVHNQk/cDcCJb0Q20Ezh03/xeMNOG7fEVYySdr1 sb41MjB8toZmrKQPhiCV7UV86UIV09mvKiQukC2zTUajyYeawTbNovHkyF/WgIRR1wiw 1fZEm8Pp8sCULy16lH+UyEPPru/k2B4B4C+FjLaEhZaIU2j/wGe/PmX2PC0lHOcpyuYe vMTg== 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=lt7TV3fXxmTrHy09O+P0XgA0ICzi0Odp54zWqWsxEC8=; b=LOEXh29QCCAMPd9SfErgKZqfGxuSLVuRjoYCa9wYVsarhxvi8QOSP5aGuxMrDsj4Qt yPkje2HIPW8NoyOZe61d/0gMb6JNXFILwKfC+AVzTl8ybf3Ktaz8xisU0xE4zEB422Se 93k+yF34oUDrUE+KJplmJ+ouN/4liiufiW+LRX3rt+OoOlQdQUdBVMGp7Q2jHjuZKmg+ YXT7UKiWm5FNFugKQ0ihMpFolp3duJk+bHQkEP+iKMcwmmu/hkG5a0x0R0dDzeQySeS/ whXVo3EuMXHGDLiPFgCc8bwTWxwsWQIlnQo4YgxQfZd9cmiBPIUi7yOVu0bfEgsm5DEw lVZw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531ei+Uj0Y8xc1EaZgJggnWRI5agvBDDvJEwz+ezuuRotlFqdYvc YzZ+JwSsGcvpb4V2/uQjkfnSDWYncZ0db+RvTvjeDA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzuATG0bi2fkA7obivgb4YNe9cYj6eq3gnLgyMnscbvHPIGDLICzzFLh94jBFKvqnzyYYD+iOGZ/0ciYP4t9zs= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8043:: with SMTP id p3mr7978824ljg.469.1593652252057; Wed, 01 Jul 2020 18:10:52 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <07c077e1-abd3-58a1-85d3-f914c450b19e@joelhalpern.com> <6031AC74-AA24-466F-A558-1465B6372270@fugue.com> In-Reply-To: <6031AC74-AA24-466F-A558-1465B6372270@fugue.com> From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2020 20:10:25 -0500 Message-ID: To: Ted Lemon Cc: "Joel M. Halpern" , gendispatch@ietf.org, eligibility-discuss@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000061243d05a96b1496" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] [Eligibility-discuss] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2020 01:10:55 -0000 --00000000000061243d05a96b1496 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 8:04 PM Ted Lemon wrote: > On Jul 1, 2020, at 20:01, Joel M. Halpern wrote: > > > > I do not see any sensible way to sort out those folks who are > participating form those who aren't. I am guessing we can live with that. > > We are only ever going to be able to approximate. > Right. I think there's also the question of how much this would matter - whether these "edge authors" are likely to volunteer for Nomcom if they aren't participating in IETF work beyond shared authorship of one or two drafts - if they appear as authors for more than a couple of working group drafts, the concern doesn't seem as significant to me. Best, Spencer > -- > Eligibility-discuss mailing list > Eligibility-discuss@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eligibility-discuss > --00000000000061243d05a96b1496 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 8:04 PM Ted Le= mon <mellon@fugue.com> wrote:=
On Jul 1, 2020,= at 20:01, Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrote:
>
> I do not see any sensible way to sort out those folks who are particip= ating form those who aren't.=C2=A0 I am guessing we can live with that.=

We are only ever going to be able to approximate.
Right. I think there's also the question of how much this w= ould matter - whether these "edge authors" are likely to voluntee= r for Nomcom if they aren't participating in IETF work beyond shared au= thorship of one or two drafts - if they appear as authors for more than a c= ouple of working group drafts, the concern doesn't seem as significant = to me.=C2=A0

Best,

Spence= r
=C2=A0
--
Eligibility-discuss mailing list
Eligibili= ty-discuss@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eli= gibility-discuss
--00000000000061243d05a96b1496-- From nobody Wed Jul 1 18:18:45 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CD083A1301 for ; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 18:18:36 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 F5h2WOyjeX9d for ; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 18:18:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qt1-x834.google.com (mail-qt1-x834.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::834]) (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 662503A12EF for ; Wed, 1 Jul 2020 18:18:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt1-x834.google.com with SMTP id v19so20017521qtq.10 for ; Wed, 01 Jul 2020 18:18:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=6rqG46iCYCNGoFz9eqYuh1QAdtiP3RSTvry4vdpBd2A=; b=ko8dabg+00WgB+5x1/oWBtxoA/Em+D6FNy/Y0/t5/6GPvAif4ZbBZaqPdwjkXaVynd C4P9lYKfS3pLTcwiZwVFe22P2fH9yiMQXg461d2Ld1ESsYewfERhL1Rw2gzI75Do872L BqhYlmZyDqnjX29aCWJcLi8ytzAg/JfLL1LDV7fiKPrAr6ZegMN8W7yX26UsqNcwy/pm 2Tzlll7NPWw8/Gp+51AEJMfOmcBZdYykjp+Y7cwYB5fZmWlJLgHviuCzAM2bFg5e3ULx E51rVhslD54F65YscyCzC/6zz/DRfzITtD4kj5RHceGoBCGGt23re+QBFjKcjsCgz+QF pRRQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=6rqG46iCYCNGoFz9eqYuh1QAdtiP3RSTvry4vdpBd2A=; b=g0XeoYdnVfB+A9WVTJa/tMro+3iUKURXLkUK9UmOIXyWEwdZsUmJyRZ9jP0n0aPU6d u746L/xrO0N+Q7YQBEL4LvrLZ5BucVkMKFxCVpkQhD61xpc2iUT8cwRq+PN86bpihQkE QoiMU8hJTGy01AWJoQyM2LytJV9HzICJ+1PbzWWkPw/+Gw9Yude1BWWDAfVR9S7erbi4 lOk+1TT+hy+2ZWb/GnJ1f777BEH+J3B01Ye+uh1vQZ+FC1qKt733+HN313OZ0KJiY1PH opA9rAuI3CIJeZS8PThDWCjsCWKCFtGxdnSprx0JxK6xs5rBfX6nbprtP7xOH2wlGAjS vifg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531bcNCPY+qtMW0OthGryVrBIpqeLlvlLy494p97kiBHONfP+4Gy Qi3Ykmb1GNv1fR4JgHVuDYDWuA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwl9snWQ/dNlyH9EK71nlnunIhSZAm/QwhOM+CZcD7gJfMXKbMV9mPyucQ3TOaTu2oJ9U0Mhg== X-Received: by 2002:aed:2927:: with SMTP id s36mr29920461qtd.226.1593652713396; Wed, 01 Jul 2020 18:18:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2601:18b:300:36ee:c093:e6ce:b3b:84c8? ([2601:18b:300:36ee:c093:e6ce:b3b:84c8]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d8sm6978594qkl.118.2020.07.01.18.18.32 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 01 Jul 2020 18:18:32 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-BCAE68D1-34B6-4C5A-8D72-CA2194E9101A Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Ted Lemon Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2020 21:18:31 -0400 Message-Id: <6FD600A0-3CE8-4ADC-A682-F1D46BC5D408@fugue.com> References: Cc: "Joel M. Halpern" , gendispatch@ietf.org, eligibility-discuss@ietf.org In-Reply-To: To: Spencer Dawkins at IETF X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18A5301v) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] [Eligibility-discuss] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2020 01:18:44 -0000 --Apple-Mail-BCAE68D1-34B6-4C5A-8D72-CA2194E9101A Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There are basically two reasons to be an edge author. One is that you have b= een added because of your reputation, and didn=E2=80=99t say no forcefully e= nough. The other is that you seek to enhance your reputation by jumping on a= bandwagon. Well, and the third is the one you are alluding to: you meant to= participate, but didn=E2=80=99t have time.=20 I think we should discourage all of these, but will never do a perfect job o= f it.=20 > On Jul 1, 2020, at 21:10, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BF >=20 >=20 >> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 8:04 PM Ted Lemon wrote: >> On Jul 1, 2020, at 20:01, Joel M. Halpern wrote: >> >=20 >> > I do not see any sensible way to sort out those folks who are participa= ting form those who aren't. I am guessing we can live with that. >>=20 >> We are only ever going to be able to approximate.=20 >=20 > Right. I think there's also the question of how much this would matter - w= hether these "edge authors" are likely to volunteer for Nomcom if they aren'= t participating in IETF work beyond shared authorship of one or two drafts -= if they appear as authors for more than a couple of working group drafts, t= he concern doesn't seem as significant to me.=20 >=20 > Best, >=20 > Spencer > =20 >> --=20 >> Eligibility-discuss mailing list >> Eligibility-discuss@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eligibility-discuss --Apple-Mail-BCAE68D1-34B6-4C5A-8D72-CA2194E9101A Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
There are basically two re= asons to be an edge author. One is that you have been added because of your r= eputation, and didn=E2=80=99t say no forcefully enough. The other is that yo= u seek to enhance your reputation by jumping on a bandwagon. Well, and the t= hird is the one you are alluding to: you meant to participate, but didn=E2=80= =99t have time. 

I thi= nk we should discourage all of these, but will never do a perfect job of it.=  

On Jul 1, 2020, a= t 21:10, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote= :

=EF=BB= =BF


On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 8:04 PM Ted L= emon <mellon@fugue.com> wrote:=
On Jul 1, 2020, a= t 20:01, Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrote:
>
> I do not see any sensible way to sort out those folks who are participa= ting form those who aren't.  I am guessing we can live with that.

We are only ever going to be able to approximate.

=
Right. I think there's also the question of how much this would m= atter - whether these "edge authors" are likely to volunteer for Nomcom if t= hey aren't participating in IETF work beyond shared authorship of one or two= drafts - if they appear as authors for more than a couple of working group d= rafts, the concern doesn't seem as significant to me. 
= --Apple-Mail-BCAE68D1-34B6-4C5A-8D72-CA2194E9101A-- From nobody Thu Jul 2 05:23:40 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD05D3A0C34; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 05:23:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 o6SC21rTyI8S; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 05:23:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lj1-x22d.google.com (mail-lj1-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::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 2503C3A0C35; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 05:23:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lj1-x22d.google.com with SMTP id z24so6831302ljn.8; Thu, 02 Jul 2020 05:23:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=yaB0+a12w71JH5M1e5uoH+38H3NtuElVPj6W7yB/i8Q=; b=VAwZMLd19z64Y1H9loPUo46Ap2kppbz5V0Mg0CwVBMaUGQwyw8Saw6HHUXNxWMJrN8 liR8qnf8Y4m+SLI6ceKisMbvbPyb/nQBBPKmncEwL8TiQ7uXwSy5zeexz3ga9qeSUPtz VhdFiEm3XBjHG5yscfPFylvCtJsb+pJ211LIAGh0Cel4VcQN1ztWWfH/v/oMnKXluvsD hKtFeazRBLecJzDxgltFiGnYGx4btwb249x5VYc5+as8VdFk+DoukagE5aJODslxAdOq vCC1BAVfm3S1kPN/dxrGFKsxVUKiFyEgxwXVluGNHi4K1rRbldb7Nx0cYCO80yaFuuDS WM2Q== 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=yaB0+a12w71JH5M1e5uoH+38H3NtuElVPj6W7yB/i8Q=; b=kGY3Z5UC2W/+q2IMG4pW6IIdDecQnK26r4eKl+ys+hhVC3IH0j7uNRX697drrw2RTj Ys0R//W3w+L2pif1IaubS4aWBycF9aTuWcqOjyTHM3cmvhmi/Cqe5jTDmITMmWvI8YBH QerTbmS/qIsJ68f7rQbpC+uCz3HABx+yP/h/mchubVGhPFQGzczf6/Y4EJUoaWig4ZIh cSyHp5STmkyFKd6NO10e+/AppwxcUBqOmyjRETLD/5vSccG6px+BZPOkajonB0i9CiXa gZF1WS/6DZi2waxBV+TDHSJshQXmpwvgbCO8QjZ27+10zjyjxuz9W5F1ZSvLNd8GVnEm AIsA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531sznUJkO0TayAHOz//r0ayexPgpp4c06wtuWz8tdk4DDwT6LRN W7ddnzQJY/gb8/+fc5k9GjTBqw+kktIy3HhKcX8/BQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzUmlyN1VRVZxrEe536oF+SBGo8sKFxkzeFWg64ftUOzQ/2b6iP95hdEAu1ZBaEopubwRKK//l1B3EilQHJsFc= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:8043:: with SMTP id p3mr9346577ljg.469.1593692605412; Thu, 02 Jul 2020 05:23:25 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <6FD600A0-3CE8-4ADC-A682-F1D46BC5D408@fugue.com> In-Reply-To: <6FD600A0-3CE8-4ADC-A682-F1D46BC5D408@fugue.com> From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2020 07:22:58 -0500 Message-ID: To: Ted Lemon Cc: "Joel M. Halpern" , gendispatch@ietf.org, eligibility-discuss@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000a078d105a9747942" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] [Eligibility-discuss] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2020 12:23:39 -0000 --000000000000a078d105a9747942 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi, Ted, On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 8:18 PM Ted Lemon wrote: > There are basically two reasons to be an edge author. One is that you hav= e > been added because of your reputation, and didn=E2=80=99t say no forceful= ly enough. > The other is that you seek to enhance your reputation by jumping on a > bandwagon. Well, and the third is the one you are alluding to: you meant = to > participate, but didn=E2=80=99t have time. > > I think we should discourage all of these, but will never do a perfect jo= b > of it. > Right (and you and I both had to do that as ADs). I think the question here is whether these edge authors have any reason to suddenly volunteer for Nomcom. If an edge author were added because of their *IETF* reputation, they might very well qualify anyway, and if an edge author is trying to achieve fame and glory in the IETF, being an edge author on more drafts seems way less trouble than volunteering to possibly be selected at random to serve on a Nomcom that they can't answer questions about :-) Best, Spencer > On Jul 1, 2020, at 21:10, Spencer Dawkins at IETF < > spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote: > > =EF=BB=BF > > > On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 8:04 PM Ted Lemon wrote: > >> On Jul 1, 2020, at 20:01, Joel M. Halpern wrote: >> > >> > I do not see any sensible way to sort out those folks who are >> participating form those who aren't. I am guessing we can live with tha= t. >> >> We are only ever going to be able to approximate. >> > > Right. I think there's also the question of how much this would matter - > whether these "edge authors" are likely to volunteer for Nomcom if they > aren't participating in IETF work beyond shared authorship of one or two > drafts - if they appear as authors for more than a couple of working grou= p > drafts, the concern doesn't seem as significant to me. > > Best, > > Spencer > > >> -- >> Eligibility-discuss mailing list >> Eligibility-discuss@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eligibility-discuss >> > --000000000000a078d105a9747942 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi, Ted,=C2=A0

On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 8:18= PM Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com&= gt; wrote:
There are basically two reasons to be an edge= author. One is that you have been added because of your reputation, and di= dn=E2=80=99t say no forcefully enough. The other is that you seek to enhanc= e your reputation by jumping on a bandwagon. Well, and the third is the one= you are alluding to: you meant to participate, but didn=E2=80=99t have tim= e.=C2=A0

I think we should= discourage all of these, but will never do a perfect job of it.=C2=A0

Right (and you and I both had to do= that as ADs). I think the question here is whether these edge authors have= any reason to suddenly volunteer for Nomcom.=C2=A0

If an edge author were added because of their *IETF* reputation, they mig= ht very well qualify anyway, and if an edge author is trying to achieve=C2= =A0fame and glory in the IETF, being an edge author on more drafts seems wa= y less trouble than volunteering to possibly be selected at random to serve= on a Nomcom that they can't answer questions=C2=A0about :-)
=
Best,=C2=A0

Spencer
=C2= =A0
On Jul 1, 2020, at 21:10, Spen= cer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:

=EF=BB=BF


On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 8:04 PM Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>= wrote:
On Jul 1= , 2020, at 20:01, Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrote:
>
> I do not see any sensible way to sort out those folks who are particip= ating form those who aren't.=C2=A0 I am guessing we can live with that.=

We are only ever going to be able to approximate.
Right. I think there's also the question of how much this w= ould matter - whether these "edge authors" are likely to voluntee= r for Nomcom if they aren't participating in IETF work beyond shared au= thorship of one or two drafts - if they appear as authors for more than a c= ouple of working group drafts, the concern doesn't seem as significant = to me.=C2=A0

Best,

Spence= r
=C2=A0
--
Eligibility-discuss mailing list
Eligibili= ty-discuss@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eli= gibility-discuss
--000000000000a078d105a9747942-- From nobody Thu Jul 2 06:59:19 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07C713A081F for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 06:59:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 6NZVCG7l6frX for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 06:59:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qt1-x829.google.com (mail-qt1-x829.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::829]) (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 F011B3A0819 for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 06:59:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qt1-x829.google.com with SMTP id u12so21238944qth.12 for ; Thu, 02 Jul 2020 06:59:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version:subject:date:message-id :references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=3dAm6koMbgDsH1AjDdQhWuja+hXi2J3cpEbhNlOcyZg=; b=dPH5K9VH7TGvLNN00RUQunkLg7bWNbdcS9OJVKCvD6HT8jXG0FFQnrHbGxcHPYUwVQ I2aWcNhqqMVPJ+kDeiQbghuBMPCUhZXURQisTEr1usvViOltTb5SajV76lqtMckib9u6 mmJHPqRWyBdHRa3pizNB8cFjCoKXQr8HBx75DfmM9zerW9+6NSss5PoHOJg24IhHYTfc ijv8OhA0bqvmnykaHTvz0R4nrfIhrbckyQ8BJoxRaXUN3BHyuG689SqvL3g6ytWMdVDH q9ISGs1JWn4wZKMb/wnTS3NpH4TrvARtTGNirAwGwSf6YgfSPeeX0esHVl5jYHeGyYRX u5qQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:content-transfer-encoding:from:mime-version :subject:date:message-id:references:cc:in-reply-to:to; bh=3dAm6koMbgDsH1AjDdQhWuja+hXi2J3cpEbhNlOcyZg=; b=uDYfBb8erGLKCQeHTYKIiNh+cMXAxYTw52KUMrAnMBwhGuoc1Pcg5YJZabQ6TGLZys vfVlMM2wr4v4sSaaomfhZ3KDgTMGDe5L9ECaQzn6gLlyzIwEDXtF1xbYHh2PDWoL7hBb FvFRpgLDdySZNxPdv2ARlC3UeeGmSZlp75VmdzN+RLkhaLkp1yyFnGRui3EzbXnaWKXq tQy7h2HXQyJzJpK6Jj639dBaWNV7osnxRqfPWhIlJJVLUaKdj//sALM4WaDNBRtqrKDl wZ5iKbbzJ96xUSr3ova6iEs0iAUQ1Z6MXJ/gQ4sur23WmaszufT15qWDU9Zf7KdDeMbW 1uag== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533hvpLcMLkaSg2q6VXtvOoTsohhQ0w9AAXPuncrxbUHt29Q4We6 Ir/Dj08d/TmdL6dS4IhW4e67fQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyWp5LWQ98kATexPp9J44EYNnifXVVwPF6kKAOQUe08H8/lRzUBLDTOULjUPx1iBaO9mUHf4g== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:4714:: with SMTP id f20mr31129004qtp.141.1593698354858; Thu, 02 Jul 2020 06:59:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2601:18b:300:36ee:9c3c:8cd7:d464:758b? ([2601:18b:300:36ee:9c3c:8cd7:d464:758b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a22sm8168234qka.64.2020.07.02.06.59.13 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 02 Jul 2020 06:59:13 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-48B1F342-9487-4119-8069-DDAE3A65A26A Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Ted Lemon Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2020 09:59:12 -0400 Message-Id: <8304B4FD-1408-4A36-8C31-C817F14B1B16@fugue.com> References: Cc: "Joel M. Halpern" , gendispatch@ietf.org, eligibility-discuss@ietf.org In-Reply-To: To: Spencer Dawkins at IETF X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (18A5301v) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] [Eligibility-discuss] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2020 13:59:18 -0000 --Apple-Mail-48B1F342-9487-4119-8069-DDAE3A65A26A Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable What I was getting at is that being an edge author is a great low-effort way= to get nomcom eligibility.=20 > On Jul 2, 2020, at 08:23, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BF > Hi, Ted,=20 >=20 >> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 8:18 PM Ted Lemon wrote: >> There are basically two reasons to be an edge author. One is that you hav= e been added because of your reputation, and didn=E2=80=99t say no forcefull= y enough. The other is that you seek to enhance your reputation by jumping o= n a bandwagon. Well, and the third is the one you are alluding to: you meant= to participate, but didn=E2=80=99t have time.=20 >>=20 >> I think we should discourage all of these, but will never do a perfect jo= b of it.=20 >=20 > Right (and you and I both had to do that as ADs). I think the question her= e is whether these edge authors have any reason to suddenly volunteer for No= mcom.=20 >=20 > If an edge author were added because of their *IETF* reputation, they migh= t very well qualify anyway, and if an edge author is trying to achieve fame a= nd glory in the IETF, being an edge author on more drafts seems way less tro= uble than volunteering to possibly be selected at random to serve on a Nomco= m that they can't answer questions about :-) >=20 > Best,=20 >=20 > Spencer > =20 >>>> On Jul 1, 2020, at 21:10, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: >>>>=20 >>> =EF=BB=BF >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 8:04 PM Ted Lemon wrote: >>>> On Jul 1, 2020, at 20:01, Joel M. Halpern wrote: >>>> >=20 >>>> > I do not see any sensible way to sort out those folks who are partici= pating form those who aren't. I am guessing we can live with that. >>>>=20 >>>> We are only ever going to be able to approximate.=20 >>>=20 >>> Right. I think there's also the question of how much this would matter -= whether these "edge authors" are likely to volunteer for Nomcom if they are= n't participating in IETF work beyond shared authorship of one or two drafts= - if they appear as authors for more than a couple of working group drafts,= the concern doesn't seem as significant to me.=20 >>>=20 >>> Best, >>>=20 >>> Spencer >>> =20 >>>> --=20 >>>> Eligibility-discuss mailing list >>>> Eligibility-discuss@ietf.org >>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eligibility-discuss --Apple-Mail-48B1F342-9487-4119-8069-DDAE3A65A26A Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
What I was getting at is t= hat being an edge author is a great low-effort way to get nomcom eligibility= . 

On Jul 2, 2020, a= t 08:23, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote= :

=EF=BB= =BF
Hi, Ted, 

On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 8:1= 8 PM Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com&= gt; wrote:
There are basically two reasons to be an edge au= thor. One is that you have been added because of your reputation, and didn=E2= =80=99t say no forcefully enough. The other is that you seek to enhance your= reputation by jumping on a bandwagon. Well, and the third is the one you ar= e alluding to: you meant to participate, but didn=E2=80=99t have time. =

I think we should discoura= ge all of these, but will never do a perfect job of it. 

Right (and you and I both had to do that as AD= s). I think the question here is whether these edge authors have any reason t= o suddenly volunteer for Nomcom. 

If an edge a= uthor were added because of their *IETF* reputation, they might very well qu= alify anyway, and if an edge author is trying to achieve fame and glory= in the IETF, being an edge author on more drafts seems way less trouble tha= n volunteering to possibly be selected at random to serve on a Nomcom that t= hey can't answer questions about :-)

Best,&nbs= p;

Spencer
 
On Jul 1, 2020, at 21:10, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf= @gmail.com> wrote:

=EF=BB=BF


=
On Wed, Jul= 1, 2020 at 8:04 PM Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> wrote:
On Jul 1, 2020, at 20:01, Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com= > wrote:
>
> I do not see any sensible way to sort out those folks who are participa= ting form those who aren't.  I am guessing we can live with that.

We are only ever going to be able to approximate.

=
Right. I think there's also the question of how much this would m= atter - whether these "edge authors" are likely to volunteer for Nomcom if t= hey aren't participating in IETF work beyond shared authorship of one or two= drafts - if they appear as authors for more than a couple of working group d= rafts, the concern doesn't seem as significant to me. 
= --Apple-Mail-48B1F342-9487-4119-8069-DDAE3A65A26A-- From nobody Thu Jul 2 11:33:51 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3674D3A0DFB; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 11:33:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 RPa1Ge2Apx2z; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 11:33:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from episteme.net (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0E8F83A0CF1; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 11:33:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3A6DB2FE59E; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 13:33:26 -0500 (CDT) Received: from episteme.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (episteme.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ke3qr8UMA4yE; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 13:33:22 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [172.16.1.6] (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5EB1FB2FE57E; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 13:33:22 -0500 (CDT) From: "Pete Resnick" To: "Brian E Carpenter" Cc: eligibility-discuss@ietf.org, gendispatch@ietf.org Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2020 13:32:43 -0500 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5693) Message-ID: <90CAC2C0-8429-4D19-8AD3-14C5ED831F08@episteme.net> In-Reply-To: References: <159364689983.18657.6862006191914858465@ietfa.amsl.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] I-D Action: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2020 18:33:39 -0000 If you'd like this on the GenDispatch agenda, please do include a slide with "dispatchy" questions like, "Where is this work going to take place?" pr On 1 Jul 2020, at 18:51, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > Hi, > > Anticipating some discussion at the next GENDISPATCH meeting, we've > updated the draft according to various comments received, and with > actual data included. Discusion on eligibility-discuss@ietf.org > please. > > I strongly recommend the HTML version: > https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03.html > so that you can enjoy the Venn diagrams in-line. Many thanks to > Robert Sparks for taking over that data analysis. > > (I'm now the world's leading expert on including OpenOffice .odp > figures in xml2rfcv3 documents. I don't recommend it unless you enjoy > manually editing SVG files.) > > Brian > > > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > Subject: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03.txt > Date: Wed, 01 Jul 2020 16:41:39 -0700 > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > Reply-To: internet-drafts@ietf.org > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > > > Title : Additional Criteria for Nominating Committee > Eligibility > Authors : Brian E. Carpenter > Stephen Farrell > Filename : draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03.txt > Pages : 6 > Date : 2020-07-01 > > Abstract: > This document defines a process experiment under RFC 3933 that > temporarily updates the criteria for qualifying volunteers to > participate in the IETF Nominating Committee. It therefore also > updates the criteria for qualifying signatories to a community > recall > petition. The purpose is to make the criteria more flexible in > view > of increasing remote participation in the IETF and a probable > decline > in face-to-face meetings. This document temporarily varies the > rules > in RFC 8713. > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand/ > > There are also htmlized versions available at: > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03 > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03 > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03 > > > Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of > submission > until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. > > Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: > ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ > > > _______________________________________________ > I-D-Announce mailing list > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt -- Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ All connections to the world are tenuous at best From nobody Thu Jul 2 17:23:19 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietf.org Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39EB33A0A80; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 17:20:38 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "\"IETF Secretariat\"" To: , Cc: alissa@cooperw.in, gendispatch@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.7.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <159373563822.30173.18092513706507876804@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2020 17:20:38 -0700 Archived-At: Subject: [Gendispatch] gendispatch - Requested session has been scheduled for IETF 108 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2020 00:20:51 -0000 Dear Pete Resnick, The session(s) that you have requested have been scheduled. Below is the scheduled session information followed by the original request. gendispatch Session 1 (0:50 requested) Thursday, 30 July 2020, Session II 1300-1350 Room Name: Room 3 size: 3 --------------------------------------------- iCalendar: https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/108/sessions/gendispatch.ics Request Information: --------------------------------------------------------- Working Group Name: General Area Dispatch Area Name: General Area Session Requester: Pete Resnick Number of Sessions: 1 Length of Session(s): 50 Minutes Number of Attendees: 150 Conflicts to Avoid: Chair Conflict: artarea cbor ace core lake quic dprive anima opsawg spring tls wpack webtrans txauth raw secdispatch Technology Overlap: genarea People who must be present: Pete Resnick Alissa Cooper Francesca Palombini Resources Requested: Special Requests: --------------------------------------------------------- From nobody Thu Jul 2 18:56:07 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37B673A0AD5 for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 18:56:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.098 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, 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 ReoXXz1hWB1m for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 18:56:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pj1-x1032.google.com (mail-pj1-x1032.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1032]) (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 D32D83A0ACD for ; Thu, 2 Jul 2020 18:56:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x1032.google.com with SMTP id gc9so6711597pjb.2 for ; Thu, 02 Jul 2020 18:56:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=awWHM4KoKEo4iGxLpBpxUpte8iwjDjUvqs5nDXUulSY=; b=DBn8bUJU6IOtvTGKF0jyQgZC0LFQWcclv+M1Ipz3NHbPWvIaCJfDzafGeQ+T3RfDFd VbAB1e+3YSyBOTU91hPfHWfZzBw4lg/Q6Crg8EmC/iMAGT7cTG7k6QfmqtrUxO63gy/2 wNCMuimtDlOFCpYeIxvpfwRLRfsJnNYo7m4BLPvDyADjLa/CAiuRY0519qSIaEnHmLdk 8mqEGxCGoK91kcUU07H2KhOR96/A6W4FUDUHUtjEuyf2nudnAO3EX0IuElteei4dkLt0 EV3aq8Tws2N98AJ+vv1PJ4ldIx3hl8heMTaK9cOfPMnD7Uybp3YqOD7jD7xFAQK0e+Y5 VN2g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=awWHM4KoKEo4iGxLpBpxUpte8iwjDjUvqs5nDXUulSY=; b=PRT1117f4rjd/cQLyBSSgrPAgMOE9OnSsaRc/5xQC6vUtNTvP6KJUhAcF7gOCevGFf K/7NYOfAYnPyRiIQXXcRZ/IwC+fRlOU5htNc3wsr2t3zJcq82KFOlPeQGQrwvBilAfL9 Kp2A+aFAKTVuxHm59Do/mdQq6oGOh9s0efyTwRpLwN5sR6L2xSysmw+Fn0O3BPI84MYp 1oYxlkA0HsZOFOan+Z0wgRQALsB7mmSkKfJyX+PdcVMrrRhkzR5dPG8Co1EKMRQp1OSm I6o+cTn7jnmtP1bx6owI3dsc6i3ciZWWtNnilHwKXcx5GSrH9gbGvJs3I4WVQ+MsxZty RgkQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532cCftbz2Hku7WjxhUlnfZFjTmmCyN0DH18pgep15UX4sMiB9Sx qt3tFOLieAPe+2dme4xsczuOP307 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzRtkS2WNRri8RZ8b5HNLyUIddU1rZ9nzpHLqqN16R7kCMzZMqKWUy0BnxOzPTeUXajhyiELA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:d215:: with SMTP id t21mr8575984ply.136.1593741363168; Thu, 02 Jul 2020 18:56:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([151.210.139.172]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o1sm8898941pjf.17.2020.07.02.18.56.01 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 02 Jul 2020 18:56:02 -0700 (PDT) To: gendispatch@ietf.org References: <8304B4FD-1408-4A36-8C31-C817F14B1B16@fugue.com> From: Brian E Carpenter Message-ID: <207de16a-1d92-abbe-63df-02fbdc84f424@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2020 13:55:59 +1200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8304B4FD-1408-4A36-8C31-C817F14B1B16@fugue.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] [Eligibility-discuss] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-carpenter-eligibility-expand-03.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2020 01:56:05 -0000 On 03-Jul-20 01:59, Ted Lemon wrote: > What I was getting at is that being an edge author is a great low-effor= t way to get nomcom eligibility..=20 Of course, that's a risk. It's hard to come up with criteria that work fo= r remote-only participants that can't be gamed. Brian >=20 >> On Jul 2, 2020, at 08:23, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: >> >> =EF=BB=BF >> Hi, Ted,=C2=A0 >> >> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 8:18 PM Ted Lemon > wrote: >> >> There are basically two reasons to be an edge author. One is that = you have been added because of your reputation, and didn=E2=80=99t say no= forcefully enough. The other is that you seek to enhance your reputation= by jumping on a bandwagon. Well, and the third is the one you are alludi= ng to: you meant to participate, but didn=E2=80=99t have time.=C2=A0 >> >> I think we should discourage all of these, but will never do a per= fect job of it.=C2=A0 >> >> >> Right (and you and I both had to do that as ADs). I think the question= here is whether these edge authors have any reason to suddenly volunteer= for Nomcom.=C2=A0 >> >> If an edge author were added because of their *IETF* reputation, they = might very well qualify anyway, and if an edge author is trying to achiev= e=C2=A0fame and glory in the IETF, being an edge author on more drafts se= ems way less trouble than volunteering to possibly be selected at random = to serve on a Nomcom that they can't answer questions=C2=A0about :-) >> >> Best,=C2=A0 >> >> Spencer >> =C2=A0 >> >>> On Jul 1, 2020, at 21:10, Spencer Dawkins at IETF > wrote: >>> >>> =EF=BB=BF >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 8:04 PM Ted Lemon > wrote: >>> >>> On Jul 1, 2020, at 20:01, Joel M. Halpern > wrote: >>> > >>> > I do not see any sensible way to sort out those folks who a= re participating form those who aren't.=C2=A0 I am guessing we can live w= ith that. >>> >>> We are only ever going to be able to approximate. >>> >>> >>> Right. I think there's also the question of how much this would m= atter - whether these "edge authors" are likely to volunteer for Nomcom i= f they aren't participating in IETF work beyond shared authorship of one = or two drafts - if they appear as authors for more than a couple of worki= ng group drafts, the concern doesn't seem as significant to me.=C2=A0 >>> >>> Best, >>> >>> Spencer >>> =C2=A0 >>> >>> --=20 >>> Eligibility-discuss mailing list >>> Eligibility-discuss@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/eligibility-discuss >>> >=20 From nobody Fri Jul 3 03:30:48 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3D00B3A0BFF for ; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 03:30:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.398 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.398 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, GB_PAYLESS=0.5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no 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 6l4a8ESXBgFX for ; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 03:30:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mta7.iomartmail.com (mta7.iomartmail.com [62.128.193.157]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A5893A0BFE for ; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 03:30:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vs3.iomartmail.com (vs3.iomartmail.com [10.12.10.124]) by mta7.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 063AUd37005011; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 11:30:39 +0100 Received: from vs3.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26CF922032; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 11:30:39 +0100 (BST) Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (unknown [10.12.10.249]) by vs3.iomartmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EE342203A; Fri, 3 Jul 2020 11:30:39 +0100 (BST) Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V ([87.113.100.254]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 063AUcgM009290 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 3 Jul 2020 11:30:38 +0100 Reply-To: From: "Adrian Farrel" To: "'Niels ten Oever'" , Cc: Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2020 11:30:37 +0100 Organization: Old Dog Consulting Message-ID: <048201d65124$fe4cd910$fae68b30$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Thread-Index: AdZRGbSG+1fE4zOBRB+1vvQbykqFPg== Content-Language: en-gb X-Originating-IP: 87.113.100.254 X-Thinkmail-Auth: adrian@olddog.co.uk X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-9.0.0.1623-8.2.0.1013-25518.006 X-TM-AS-Result: No--8.803-10.0-31-10 X-imss-scan-details: No--8.803-10.0-31-10 X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-9.0.0.1623-8.2.1013-25518.006 X-TMASE-Result: 10--8.802500-10.000000 X-TMASE-MatchedRID: hFbMlnd2lLM0QDP3j4T8uYJz2+XV6lWrWWWKbgcV5YCaR0BTe6y8q8uS Xx71bvSL6GQ0NbQtRg83OfkpzZYFk0/r5l8Y5MbdCk2OYQHmEvZO8qlnOXFSz8t3zHe6QppecJH SK1bfF9V/DpqL1k5M+3fJp0r2LKg+cLqAjziI0ICv32t0t0cTKMHdTNr3GHQ0+D+zbdY8Eilpsn GGIgWMmVtEUzPReCECB75KU9J462G34S9ZgPkWjD3qUaC7D/bCuoibJpHRrFmGUvn89UwyEoYZn WnmoyARWDI93EJcO75MRLGjrfrQAv6iu0Sx6m6AskMOZF8v88tzu6riTtYUo6xT+JfQDbCPRLtA Z/mBFjwUXwNSNzpaqi49tipTJKuUqLbn38WZ3sRbyxAy8+P9fBC73rGHqfHqMVx/3ZYby78Uvn9 3ewYiguK5fhRxt1aAeS9CmYHNMbxxgAl+Fte2mlKLaa5QgfmrqHH6xh+Zp96IWGvfT9ZpjAef9e WpmQlIZSgPkksZfMCrBF1Y6NemyewEs3NBXxH6WZgvP9yNYboD2WXLXdz+ASH2Y0Xxk8nYqxhnx MCjAyIRRLfe6UPgvDcK3i1rr+3/ySj5eUXePq9jFNgY8SnxHCIlPYcelunmJih/yo+OvlUcI/pZ s+xxLy9xyQrT0iniFko6OvLNpDPO0kQiIxCRX9lMJeIHykXSamejoqUad3qAwt46EiEGhNvgL7K v8y9BnNQtKWsDvNC/tZo6PIVJ5ZmsDX0xhfdbWU1PB7OtaKCI8hHRrWLqF3HhSskMF1smWsmqFP PRYfadNC251TPFykVW0kglgHQ7NHO4u2DwUDncFOQoK25dTp4CIKY/Hg3AWQy9YC5qGvzQgdTAL NxFY9mLAT3xW5tbbdTuPa9VRGvEQdG7H66TyKsQd9qPXhnJO+6o7+vq58R0qrjXE+Moc94A+XS4 STrpnpKBQTuJHeB57nyi7+0Ojg== X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-12:0,22:0,33:0,34:0-0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-02 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2020 10:30:46 -0000 Thanks, Niels and Mallory, for having the strength to persevere with = this important topic. I would like to see the IETF reach some fairly = rapid resolution on the thrust of your work so that we can advise = authors and the RPC on the way we want to use language. I have some lengthy thoughts, below. I reviewed the formatted markdown = at https://github.com/IRTF-HRPC/drafts/blob/master/draft-terminology.md = based on commit 150a2a7 on 2020-06-18. My notes were compiled as I read the document and so my thoughts = developed as I read/wrote.=20 Best, Adrian =3D=3D=3D The big thing that stuck out when I got to the end was, "Are you trying = to capture terms that should be substituted, or are you just providing = two blatant examples in an attempt to drive the process and discussion = forward. I think it is the latter, but this is very far from evident as = you start into the document. This would benefit from a very clear = statement right at the top of the document. --- At several points I worry about your use of words like "racist". I fear = that that word carries a lot of emotion at the moment. And it is often = felt to be accusatory. I would suggest taking a more neutral tone with = "a term that some people may find unacceptable or offensive based on its = connotations or etymology." Indeed, I think you don't want to be limited = to only some *ist terms, but want to eliminate all discriminatory or = divisive language. (Note that we found with RFC 7776, if you try to list = every way that someone can get it wrong you end up missing out one thing = and thereby appear to condone it.) I'm sure you want to call out = language for what it is, but I would caution that your objective is to = remove the use of language that is of itself racist, or that engenders = or supports racism, without insinuating that someone who has used that = term without knowing any better is actually a racist person. That seems, = to me, a whole different debate that it is not worth having and which = will distract from the work you are trying to do. There is a delicate balance in the use of "some people may find this = offensive" because we do need to avoid victim-blaming. And maybe it is = not the offense that is given that we actually care about. We care about = the broader impact of the use of the word: how it supresses people = directly, and how it builds a culture or overt or subconscious = prejudice. So there may be other words that we should use. In fact, = perhaps we don't want blame in any direction: we just want to stop using = those words. --- Title I would suggest making it clearer that your scope is specifically drafts = and RFCs. I know it would be nice to apply it to everything, or at least = everything the IETF does, but I believe in achievable goals! How = about... =20 "Terminology, Power, and Inclusive Language in Internet-Drafts and RFCs" --- Abstract Conversely to the previous point (=F0=9F=98=8A) the Abstract just says = "RFCs". I think we want the scope to be Internet-Drafts. In fact, = although RFCs are a matter of record, it is possible that I-Ds have more = effect on the day-to-day nature of the IETF.=20 =20 Also, I don't believe at this stage you should try to change language in = RFCs that have already been published. I think the scope of this = document should explicitly rule out changing any published RFCs.=20 That leaves me suggesting the Abstract should read (including some fixes = for style)... =20 This document argues for moving away from certain specific language = conventions sometimes used by RFC authors and the RFC Production Centre = in order to encourage the use of more inclusive terminology in = Internet-Drafts that are work in progress, and in new RFCs that may be = published in any of the RFC series. The document also provides examples = of inclusive terminology as precise alternatives for these conventions. =20 --- =20 General point.=20 =20 I like how you have used positive language (for example, in the = Abstract). There is a difference (IMNSHO) opinion between "inclusive = terminology" and "terminology that is not exclusive". This may be petty = pedantry on my part, or (and I'd be happy to be told this is the case) = it may be that I am not correctly aware of the nuances. =20 I would find it gentler to say "...encourage the use of less-exclusive = terminology..." =20 That is, our objective is to avoid being exclusive, rather than to be = explicitly inclusive. Let's take the "blacklist" example. Your alternatives are all = reasonable, but they are not "inclusive". The very nature of the lists = described are exclusive, and the alternative names are not constructed = to give a feeling of inclusion. But, the alternative names *are* less = exclusive. My point, in summary, is to frame everything in the context of = "exclusive" and "not exclusive" rather than using "inclusive". --- =20 Introduction =20 You have not provided an attribution to the first quote, so I presume = that you are taking it from the same source as the second quote (i.e., = RFC 7322). But you have changed something! 7322 says, "The ultimate goal = of the RFC publication process is to produce documents that are = readable, clear, consistent, and reasonably uniform." I think that might = be considered a bit near the edge. =20 You are missing a close quote on the second passage from RFC 7322 =20 Your language here jumps around a bit between "IETF" and "IETF/IRTF". I = think your target (as I expressed in my proposed changes to the Title = and Abstract) is all Internet-Drafts and RFCs. You want to cover all = streams and all RFCs. =20 The final paragraph basically says "We only actually found two sets of = terms in use that need attention." Is that really the case? Or is this = just a starting point for this draft with the anticipation of finding = further problematic terms? If you are providing specifics for action, I = would drag personal pronouns out of "Other Considerations" and give it = its own section with the same relevance as b/w and m/s, and I would also = call out terms like "black hole" (in the sense of where traffic = disappears to), "blackhat", and even "invalid". But this is part of the = big questions about the document's intent - *if* it is your intention to = add more terms as you do more work on the document, then say so up = front, if, OTOH, your objective is to get to the recommendations, then = say that and state that you are only "providing some notable examples." I hate (hate, hate) Introductions that tell me what I am going to find = in each section. There is a Table of Contents for that. I think this = might be a carry-over from writing academic papers (where I am always = told off for not including it), and while it is not uncommon in = Internet-Drafts, it feels unnecessary and a bit pedagogical. =20 So, a suggested rewrite of the Introduction is... =20 According to {{RFC7322}}, "The ultimate goal of the RFC publication = process is to produce documents that are readable, clear, consistent, = and reasonably uniform," and one function of the RFC Editor is to = "[c]orrect larger content/clarity issues; flag any unclear passages for = author review." Documents that are published as RFCs are first worked on = as Internet-Drafts. =20 Given the importance of communication between people developing Internet = standards and related documents, it is worth considering the effects of = terminology that has been identified as exclusionary. This document = argues that certain obviously exclusionary terms should be avoided and = replaced with alternatives. =20 This document presents arguments for why exclusionary terms should be = avoided in Internet-Drafts and RFCs, describes the problems introduced = by some specific terms, and proposes alternative language. The terms = discussed in this document include "master-slave" and = "whitelist-blacklist". Accepted and inserted, with small change at the end. --- =20 Terminology =20 I think you only use the special terminology in the "Recommendations" = section. This is an Informational document and you are making recommendations. = That makes the use of 2119 language a bit iffy.=20 I would suggest dropping this section and using lower case in the = "Recommendations" section, but it's not a big deal. --- =20 Terminology and Power at the IETF =20 Again, I'd like you to consider whether you are targeting the IETF or = "Internet-Drafts and RFCs". =20 Sometimes where you have "RFCs" you should have "Internet-Drafts and = RFCs". Where you are talking about actions by the RFC Editor, then sure, = that only applies to "new RFCs", but surely we want authors to act as = well? I confess I would not have written this section in this way. But that is = personal style. Let me, however, flag a few of the lumpier bumps from my = PoV. =20 - Para 1. "This implies that..." I don't think it implies what you claim = it does. It talks about the goals of rhetorical theory, not the = desirability of rhetorical theory or the outcomes of its goals. And = actually, I think most readers will be lost by the time they see = "rhetorical theory": is this a document about rhetorical theory or about = terminology, power, and inclusive language in the Internet-Drafts and = RFCs? I think I would strip from the top of the paragraph down to "In = order to effectively communicate..." Obviously that means you have to = fix up "She continues". [BTW I stumbled over "language use". The English = is correct, but my eyes wanted to see "language used"] The alternative = here would be to make clearer *why* we should apply rhetorical theory in = the case of RFCs and Internet-Drafts. - Para 2. A major problem with the terms "racist" and "sexist" is that = they are understood by many people to be conscious or wilful acts = founded on beliefs. The concept of ingrained or unconscious racism and = sexism is much harder to grapple with for most people. See my = introductory text. This may be handled by saying (perhaps in the = Terminology section) something like, "We consider terms that serve to = oppress or diminish people, or that tend to reinforce conscious or = unconscious prejudices to be 'racist' or 'sexist' language, and we use = those descriptions through-out this document." - Para 3 s/avoided but/avoided, but/ - Para 4 s/linguistics and power and attempts/linguistics and power, and = attempts/ =20 - Para 4 "attempts to '...promote awareness that may lead to eventual = wide-spread change" {{BrodieGravesGraves}}'. I think that you are doing = more than promoting awareness in your "Recommendations" section. Maybe = '...attempts to "promote awareness that may lead to eventual wide-spread = change" {{BrodieGravesGraves}} and suggests first steps for actions that = may remedy the inadvertent use of undesirable terms'. - Para 4 s/To that effect, below is a tersely written list/To that end, = the list below is a tersely written set/ - Para 4 A pedant asks: Are we really only worried about "offensive = metaphors". Actually, please say "metaphors that may cause offense" = since (again) the question of intent and subjective vs objective offense = is best avoided in this community. But anyway, my point was, what about = similes? And indeed, is "blacklist" even a metaphor (rather than a = metaphorical construct) - it's not as though there is such a thing as a = black list and we have stolen the term. Perhaps just stick with "term" = and "language". [BTW, this opens up another topic of discussion that = could easily be a rat-hole (oops, there's a metaphor): the use of = metaphors in any cross-cultural or technical communication tends to be = poor style and should be avoided. While it would be great to see our = style guide recommending against the use of metaphors in general, I = don't think this is the objective of this piece of work.] =20 - Para 4 "encouraged to correct larger content and clarity issues with = respect to offensive metaphors" - What does "larger" mean? Isn't it unnecessarily subjective? - bullet 4 Do we have to have "gender-non-conforming"? By suggesting = that this both a requirement to conform and some situation that is = "normal" it is, itself, an offensive term where I come from. I struggle = to find the correct term to use here, but my advice would be that where = the short term is difficult, it is better to use more words to describe = the situation. I could only come up with "people who make their own = choice as to their gender representation" and I'm not satisfied with = that. =20 --- =20 Master Slave I found para 3 very interesting and, erm, stimulating. But is it the = discussion you want to have here? If I can argue about whether "the role = of the master was to abdicate" was anything other than sarcasm, then I = am arguing about the wrong topic. Why give me that opportunity? Do you = need this paragraph? =20 --- Master Slave =20 The final paragraph of this section is striking and true. Does it belong = here (it is not in any way specific to the Master Slave issue) or should = be further up the document where you can use it to set context that = there is work needed. Indeed, in this paragraph you provide a quote = about PC and minorities, but you state specifically that this is racism. = It may be, but the quote appears to be more general and one that needs = to be used to cover the whole document. Or perhaps it should be in both = places. --- =20 Suggested Alternatives (to Master Slave) =20 But s/alternatives for the master-slave relationship/alternatives for = the term master-slave/ =20 I would strongly suggest to remove from this list any suggestions that = are also metaphors that have overtones that are not helpful: - Leader-follower - Coordinator-worker - Parent-helper The penultimate paragraph is confusing to me. "Since the use of master-slave is becoming less common in other = technical communities, it is best to simply duplicate the metaphor being = used by comparable or interoperable technologies. Likewise, the IETF can = show positive leadership in the technical community by setting standards = without using offensive metaphors." - Why would you duplicate a metaphor? Why not "...substitute the term = being used..." - What does "Likewise" mean in this context? --- Other Considerations =20 "As we have seen," is one of those style things that I think should be = avoided - Who are we? Were we paying attention? Perhaps "As described in the preceding sections," --- =20 Other Considerations "like all written text," Do you mean to distinguish from other uses of = language? Is it OK for me to say "blacklist" at the mic in an IETF = meeting so long as I don't write it in my I-D? =20 --- =20 Other Considerations "We propose nothing more than additional care in the choice of language = just as care is taken in defining standards and protocols themselves." =20 This would be a wonderful thing to say in the Introduction. It is a = great way to defuse the reader's preconceptions. --- Other Considerations "The above two examples are not exhaustive, nor are they mere examples = and require action" =20 The fact that you are "just providing two examples" was lost on me = (hence some of my earlier burbling). It would be really helpful if the = Introduction (and maybe even the Abstract) was very clear that: - our main objective is to establish the necessity for action and to = propose actions - we do this by providing two significant examples that need attention = immediately, but this is not a complete list and there will be many = other terms that need to be considered. =20 That said, I think your text here is a little hard to read. Perhaps... "The two examples provided above are not the only cases of offensive = language to be avoided, and many more can be collected. However, these = two examples are particularly significant and require immediate action." =20 --- =20 Other Considerations s/However, we/We/ --- =20 Other Considerations =20 "That some of these metaphors are offensive leaves no excuses for their = continued use." There is ambiguity in the English here that you *really* = want to avoid! How about... "If any of these metaphors is offensive there is no excuse for its = continued use." --- =20 Other Considerations 'A term like "man-in-the-middle" is not technically useful. It is not a = standard term, not as clear as its alternative "on-path attacker", and = should therefore be avoided' =20 Actually, I think it is way clearer than "on-path attacker" for two = reasons: 1. It is so widely used as to have instant recognition 2. On-path has to be thought about because an attack may include = diverting the message off its intended path =20 So, to avoid these discussions we need to focus on the issue not the = debate over whether it is useful. I'd even say black-list is useful! =20 Oh, and I assume you actually mean the term "man-in-the-middle" not a = term like it! =20 How about... For example, the term "man-in-the-middle" has not be explicitly = standardised, and should be replaced with an alternative such as = "on-path attacker" without fear of loss of meaning. --- =20 Other Considerations "to employ the use of metaphors or to parrot terms of art" =20 Unintentional joke? "To parrot" is metaphorical construct that you can replace with = "unthinkingly repeat" --- Other Considerations "We welcome additional examples of terminology that might be avoided = through more awareness and thoughtfulness." I'm not sure what your intention is here. Do you want a growing list = with more examples? Creating such a list causes people to assume that = items not on the list remain acceptable. And I'm not sure that more = examples are necessary to explain your message. On the other hand, categories of language to avoid may be useful. You = specifically mention military language, and I think that is a good = category to avoid. I also think that the use of sporting language is = very problematic (touching base, striking out, not reaching first base, = coming from left field, dropping the ball, scoring, getting the ball = over the line, being caught out) because it is culturally based metaphor = (or simile) and is problematic in three related but distinct ways: 1. It is cultural imperialism where the reader is forced to acknowledge = the culture of the author. 2. The meaning may be wholly lost because the reader has no idea what = the term means. 3. The meaning may be reversed because the reader perfectly understands = the term, but in their culture the meaning of the term is different. I think we should avoid the debate (per Orwell) of whether all metaphors = or idioms are bad. That can be a debate for a style guide discussion, = but it is not *this* debate. However, I would like to stress that the = use of language that is heavily culturally based, *is* exclusionary, = puts people on the outside, and makes them feel uncomfortable. Thus, = without going as far as "all metaphors are bad" we might encourage = authors to "consider avoiding the use of metaphors that require specific = cultural knowledge or understanding." Language is always a representation of a specific world view, and it is = precisely the imposition of a specific world view that can be harmful. =20 --- Recommendations "To summarise, we have bulleted some very concrete action points that = can be taken by Editors, reviewers and Authors, both present and = future." =20 I'd want to clarify that this is for work in progress not going back = over the canon. So, perhaps... =20 "To summarise, we have bulleted some very concrete action points that = can be taken by Editors, reviewers and Authors, both present and future = as they develop and publish Internet-Drafts and new RFCs." =20 --- Recommendations Authors bullets 1 and 2 are missing xref citations at the end of the = lines. --- Recommendations Final Author bullet says "Consider rolling back technical hard coding of = their standards implementations with the documented knowledge available = online" and, supportive though I am, I have no clue what that is asking = me to do! I have honestly tried to read it a dozen times and while I can = guess, I can't actually extract meaning =E2=98=B9 --- Recommendations If I were an editor (oh, I am) I would want (need) a style sheet that = collects all terms that have been considered, and for each whether it is = acceptable, and if not what terms I should consider instead. This is = pretty important, and I think you need to make that a third = recommendation for the RFC Editor (it should be published, just like the = style guide and the abbreviations list). Then I would put an additional entry in the Authors list telling them to = look at the style sheet --- Recommendations Final RFC editor bullet says "Suggest to Authors that even when = referencing other specifications that have not replaced offensive = terminology they could provide another term with a note that the term is = original and not being suggested by the Author." I think the meaning is = lost a little at the end because the "term" is not the "term" = =F0=9F=98=8A =20 Perhaps... "Suggest to Authors that even when referencing other specifications that = have not replaced offensive terminology, the Authors could use another = term in their document and include a note to say that they have used the = new term as a replacement for the term used in the referenced document." --- =20 Additional References Not Cited Above I suggest you call this "Further reading" since "References" has a = specific meaning related to being cited. --- Security Considerations =20 I wonder whether you can do better than this. Certainly, don't call this = a "research document"! Have a think about the impact of wrong language = on security and privacy. Do people who are upset by language pay less = attention to the content? If the content concerns security, does that = mean security may be compromised? Do we notice that security = considerations often make use of exactly the language we are concerned = by and that it is important that the security community picks substitute = terms that convey the right meaning within that community? =20 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > Dear all, > > I hope this email finds you all very well. The current global debate > about systemic and institutional racism has led several technology > communities to reconsider their language and practices. Within the > IETF this discussion has been ongoing for the last years. Mallory and > I thought we could perhaps contribute to this discussion with the > following draft: > > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-knodel-terminology-02 > > We're happy to receive comments and suggestions on-list, off-list,=20 > and/or as PR here: > > https://github.com/IRTF-HRPC/drafts/blob/master/draft-terminology.md > > Looking forward to discuss this here, and perhaps as well during > IETF108.=20 > > We hope we can find community consensus on this topic. > > Best, > > Mallory and Niels From nobody Wed Jul 8 06:22:59 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A40793A0ADB for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 06:22:57 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.398 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.398 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, GB_PAYLESS=0.5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no 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 U4ne7dFrfdQw for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 06:22:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smarthost1.greenhost.nl (smarthost1.greenhost.nl [195.190.28.88]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E7D5B3A0AD9 for ; Wed, 8 Jul 2020 06:22:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.greenhost.nl ([213.108.110.112]) by smarthost1.greenhost.nl with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jtA2D-0001zy-FB for gendispatch@ietf.org; Wed, 08 Jul 2020 15:22:50 +0200 To: gendispatch@ietf.org References: <048201d65124$fe4cd910$fae68b30$@olddog.co.uk> From: Niels ten Oever Autocrypt: addr=lists@digitaldissidents.org; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mQINBFgpcR0BEACnfvNwTMlN+pyZT0AFYhWqxG3N4AoPIeNfbxLQH7dk8ZL7Ls05xtORfnu9 ovoaRrZpDufkMviUFidNYePbQNdgf63vWVgwpQR7utluwWraetcmZOu6tayJuyBK2b6d2Z23 MJAQxfa2/GMlN3QkvobaoyKtgbc8rOCgNla7WwkgtiVJ89xbAUHXPFpKWZluVRjaFh4p5C5r 7E5OvUiEGLQ5Cn2ir2PGIyIVqjB+hLTyaI6dIGCz2jtL0RATjmsmYUX7UkU/pz8MPPC2BJ5P KU9pdXMRBhAStxcph8vCo2ze9xSi3+1/5A2ULVtvO4s0hZ+exbTfMxMg3H5CCRFEEJXlQEXa Cd0ZHvqcv5xq8n9w/Ccd0CqYWATIwyP8Jlzd+BY3QGTWnWlgoAbs3Guh/pFYhEFNuuAF5Jk1 k5OlNGsRE/LQJmbT5SE7AtLJLbWewcHlEyIH+K6J8uVa4ExLXmRy+eRkFaxjGy3fLlUpy1Ee 1kU7VsQ/TZ8g8ujsMzxqsdB6y0TD/kVlWaDqPL6F+b+pm3lAuCBGWM1YZROTG58R6pD7sNVm i0ift4dIttAsg+2KoShm9A8kQ3tACXZDgNPC0l7VOqnVayjnF0RmjGeiX7PjOcLQCZ9a5wAH 5mrXMaKvfszqAVkP9HSrk1QVZOipF6vEimL43Czy7Rp1aUaUwwARAQABtC1OaWVscyB0ZW4g T2V2ZXIgPGxpc3RzQGRpZ2l0YWxkaXNzaWRlbnRzLm9yZz6JAj8EEwEIACkFAlgvB3YCGyMF CQlmAYAHCwkIBwMCAQYVCAIJCgsEFgIDAQIeAQIXgAAKCRAO2D86RorIs56yD/44BSJvKnjH ex0nhPDI9nIJlzlnypa4qsniy0obG5GRbVRikT1E1xaz7VBoPs39hCywoIWd6p0hs1PG1Tcj WV0GwNKRt90PPEh6iNJSGjV2Aq3IlME/aUViD9008yfbRSqfsnPXLW1kpCoZNaOSNzpURoM9 OkVU/z4LSLD61SfFFByBne/GkJKt96/fcspBif1GPC//63ZKFrDqQ9JFR6dECAmsKv7baayz MTv3wrTcqpuHcqJIv4vTm8IPx1QiGgEvrMwsPZz/vx8bMdxxxHWgCcbrt+0b3tRzq9ATZwG3 xDiwnJgKd+ioZOC/b5sY69721sqwBmWYyXWVqtqt01xIgNZjr/wixam+l1bTGUgj0rwPWJWx +7Whe25ff+mNNW/UQeCBjZlxoxAJWSr1Pp3n+SQKQ4TLs8wIwHZtcVCffepfHd47CEbnR8Kc Tjm3tlKzSWq4zcUy6BaxHfgn9+HaAM7fwLqx9/WAtSfdmLXJTN+Swy0w/slakD75jl2o7U3e ETjoYQWt+306X2Uly/0ge7VEQ4ySmmbru6U5ainGE95gjsc++s+hvKmMuGYL3h4ijE1RSe/k wgM6/Z1B6JosssdX+KRuuk2A4FHGbcee8LUIJ3C36qyI7s6PJBXi6SjIPN0wpx30P/DUf/Lr o5lmHF03qQ5eeqI8lDwIobWlJbkCDQRYKXEdARAAxYOE3/AFmEfQ0SVVFujYFhZKX+BGXolY ytC2a1soZogVYTIIlypxkRtN+ljteFAY3xX/El7cx5Fxj+uXvLKAm9xQRI/DCug7/NGULMk9 bDK5bzSGw817cyiL5Kb+0RkWj2Y5ArOAK6XPGBZWZTHwyIawsSCN9AhDXZQWVRqkR1QXcq3I YKl+OHWMO7+1VfixCSakNf7T/Kiq46rQEPW8Eghk6CVOBR8xUCBbyk5aRW4VSGO6pUD3H21u r+5fTLsVyan1NHhxNNiXfnEJKr+JI5dXSkj7WqA5n8ITaNdFSAttkdT56wAQpxE2h8zaOmBa FUWQ4D8SdXDVymP5QMtLG+ItMMiNV6kXgsRFugAKM5yZtPP9gIX+ic8QO5iuct37bRXJU/rm rH54Ab0kyAeeRE7oSsfTZPKvgtUh7VLAUEw/wy6TORJHE8JMaX0yYT6h4PGRS3mNM4bka8hj dfcrexI0zSqFOl2I22zQlG3YqSzIvVh98W67hxfAIaCVaTfJLFPEru3drxNwi6ogdkRmcLGK qqTgeYItrvITyFvzqbrcO2exp0KKEK3cDIZypqHHUf4+uPlDtuExehLsNOMpjP8qhZpFtyLe DS07qunbvstcyvR30wOJ3DyAbHGzq739UyDcO9Jt5jwODyVwk3MK5Em4pJ0+IAJx+F6gta0B k2MAEQEAAYkCJQQYAQgADwUCWClxHQIbDAUJCWYBgAAKCRAO2D86RorIs0ykD/4t151SZG9M beKRVKbs9Ecjady9bO0L3oBos4rhqY12ha8smFlsUzvbgB4CtkBuXQlq+plOBWv+rFEThOzy 3bezgEDjlxycoO1W2wJD6E7Fo9fkHT6UOm9fQBkuKRqK83OGnfM02qP1Ky8d7EoZz+nTSMf/ DJgWw1YRKrXkMHBwKD83lCENsmePWE5AjMqk8cojPv9Oy1wWy6fHjwx3r+wQSokBNfxgQyAF onmgBbhlic/pZUYRSIcldyUlaomrjFfr4egzmNE7aWDvLwOUYKevBIeJJcqTyfAn3TtJbPCE HOC2+lP6EcmPFyhQdiia+RqOClumqbWOPeQ2VM8j7NWvKKmBNBB5OJ/rmHogbNU+wWPJ723q MBoOp1jIwFNkQhx01W6v55VMwLr+IuBKY1ggJ2BhwQiGpWv4tMc5oB/qVh3my1VO65ErcJ3S 9blpwJdDj5/YDOU7BKEmpRUP+xkaryNzH2x7FzrOOHzJBX6jeYZabGvnTicQlBAzfGpblFqV 3YN6EhCF2AHmGLTZ/DrjGYToIsW8cXlEMqN4u8ODEUY0OhbnytnopKJKk99bwMoCqDkfQvT3 LKDWtZj9NzFndfuoKXsVpwAitrG0mau0/16DKDyVWdtJ9DYmtE40zO6g70VVxUj+dKt2hbJT y/KQTb7Ijhw7wZrGp/P7nhbVyA== Message-ID: <384c05c3-6683-3d5f-91af-c09c40fbe5c4@digitaldissidents.org> Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2020 15:22:44 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.9.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <048201d65124$fe4cd910$fae68b30$@olddog.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-Authenticated-As-Hash: 29cc722430e8f1f6ed904119444c0d49b0f3ee91 X-Virus-Scanned: by clamav at smarthost1.samage.net X-Scan-Signature: 172e1dd621b341c7c4596ecd7b43f4a9 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-03 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Jul 2020 13:22:58 -0000 RGVhciBBZHJpYW4sIA0KDQpUaGFua3MgYSBsb3QgZm9yIHlvdXIgZXh0ZW5zaXZlIHJldmll dyENCg0KRGVhciBhbGwsDQoNCldlIGhhdmUgcmVjZWl2ZWQgcXVpdGUgYSBsb3QgcmV2aWV3 cywgYWN0dWFsbHkgd2UgaGF2ZSBuZXZlciByZWNlaXZlZCBzbyBtYW55IG9mZi1saXN0IHJl dmlld3Mgb2YgYSBkb2N1bWVudC4gVGhpcyBtaWdodCBpbmRpY2F0ZSBib3RoIHRoZSBpbXBv cnRhbmNlIGFzIHdlbGwgYXMgdGhlIHNlbnNpdGl2aXR5IG9mIHRoZSBkcmFmdCBhdCBoYW5k LiANCg0KQmFzZWQgb24gdGhlIHJldmlld3Mgd2UgcmVjZWl2ZWQsIHdlIGhhdmUgY3JlYXRl ZCBhIG5ldyBkcmFmdCB3aGljaCBjYW4gYmUgZm91bmQgaGVyZTogDQoNCmh0dHBzOi8vdG9v bHMuaWV0Zi5vcmcvaHRtbC9kcmFmdC1rbm9kZWwtdGVybWlub2xvZ3ktMDMuIA0KDQpJZiBw ZW9wbGUgaGF2ZSBtb3JlIGlucHV0LCB3ZSdyZSBoYXBweSB0byBkaXNjdXNzIGl0IGVpdGhl ciBiZWZvcmUgb3IgZHVyaW5nIHRoZSBtZWV0aW5nLiBCb3RoIG9uIHRoaXMgbGlzdCwgb2Zm LWxpc3QsIG9yIHZpYSBwdWxsIHJlcXVlc3RzIGFuZC9vciBpc3N1ZXMgb24gZ2l0aHViOg0K DQpodHRwczovL2dpdGh1Yi5jb20vSVJURi1IUlBDL2RyYWZ0cy9ibG9iL21hc3Rlci9kcmFm dC10ZXJtaW5vbG9neS5tZA0KDQpBbGwgdGhlIGJlc3QsDQoNCk5pZWxzIGFuZCBNYWxsb3J5 DQoNCg0KDQoNCk9uIDcvMy8yMCAxMjozMCBQTSwgQWRyaWFuIEZhcnJlbCB3cm90ZToNCj4g VGhhbmtzLCBOaWVscyBhbmQgTWFsbG9yeSwgZm9yIGhhdmluZyB0aGUgc3RyZW5ndGggdG8g cGVyc2V2ZXJlIHdpdGggdGhpcyBpbXBvcnRhbnQgdG9waWMuIEkgd291bGQgbGlrZSB0byBz ZWUgdGhlIElFVEYgcmVhY2ggc29tZSBmYWlybHkgcmFwaWQgcmVzb2x1dGlvbiBvbiB0aGUg dGhydXN0IG9mIHlvdXIgd29yayBzbyB0aGF0IHdlIGNhbiBhZHZpc2UgYXV0aG9ycyBhbmQg dGhlIFJQQyBvbiB0aGUgd2F5IHdlIHdhbnQgdG8gdXNlIGxhbmd1YWdlLg0KPiANCj4gSSBo YXZlIHNvbWUgbGVuZ3RoeSB0aG91Z2h0cywgYmVsb3cuIEkgcmV2aWV3ZWQgdGhlIGZvcm1h dHRlZCBtYXJrZG93biBhdCBodHRwczovL2dpdGh1Yi5jb20vSVJURi1IUlBDL2RyYWZ0cy9i bG9iL21hc3Rlci9kcmFmdC10ZXJtaW5vbG9neS5tZCBiYXNlZCBvbiBjb21taXQgMTUwYTJh NyBvbiAyMDIwLTA2LTE4Lg0KPiANCj4gTXkgbm90ZXMgd2VyZSBjb21waWxlZCBhcyBJIHJl YWQgdGhlIGRvY3VtZW50IGFuZCBzbyBteSB0aG91Z2h0cyBkZXZlbG9wZWQgYXMgSSByZWFk L3dyb3RlLiANCj4gDQo+IEJlc3QsDQo+IEFkcmlhbg0KPiANCj4gPT09DQo+IA0KPiBUaGUg YmlnIHRoaW5nIHRoYXQgc3R1Y2sgb3V0IHdoZW4gSSBnb3QgdG8gdGhlIGVuZCB3YXMsICJB cmUgeW91IHRyeWluZyB0byBjYXB0dXJlIHRlcm1zIHRoYXQgc2hvdWxkIGJlIHN1YnN0aXR1 dGVkLCBvciBhcmUgeW91IGp1c3QgcHJvdmlkaW5nIHR3byBibGF0YW50IGV4YW1wbGVzIGlu IGFuIGF0dGVtcHQgdG8gZHJpdmUgdGhlIHByb2Nlc3MgYW5kIGRpc2N1c3Npb24gZm9yd2Fy ZC4gSSB0aGluayBpdCBpcyB0aGUgbGF0dGVyLCBidXQgdGhpcyBpcyB2ZXJ5IGZhciBmcm9t IGV2aWRlbnQgYXMgeW91IHN0YXJ0IGludG8gdGhlIGRvY3VtZW50LiBUaGlzIHdvdWxkIGJl bmVmaXQgZnJvbSBhIHZlcnkgY2xlYXIgc3RhdGVtZW50IHJpZ2h0IGF0IHRoZSB0b3Agb2Yg dGhlIGRvY3VtZW50Lg0KPiANCj4gLS0tDQo+IA0KPiBBdCBzZXZlcmFsIHBvaW50cyBJIHdv cnJ5IGFib3V0IHlvdXIgdXNlIG9mIHdvcmRzIGxpa2UgInJhY2lzdCIuIEkgZmVhciB0aGF0 IHRoYXQgd29yZCBjYXJyaWVzIGEgbG90IG9mIGVtb3Rpb24gYXQgdGhlIG1vbWVudC4gQW5k IGl0IGlzIG9mdGVuIGZlbHQgdG8gYmUgYWNjdXNhdG9yeS4gSSB3b3VsZCBzdWdnZXN0IHRh a2luZyBhIG1vcmUgbmV1dHJhbCB0b25lIHdpdGggImEgdGVybSB0aGF0IHNvbWUgcGVvcGxl IG1heSBmaW5kIHVuYWNjZXB0YWJsZSBvciBvZmZlbnNpdmUgYmFzZWQgb24gaXRzIGNvbm5v dGF0aW9ucyBvciBldHltb2xvZ3kuIiBJbmRlZWQsIEkgdGhpbmsgeW91IGRvbid0IHdhbnQg dG8gYmUgbGltaXRlZCB0byBvbmx5IHNvbWUgKmlzdCB0ZXJtcywgYnV0IHdhbnQgdG8gZWxp bWluYXRlIGFsbCBkaXNjcmltaW5hdG9yeSBvciBkaXZpc2l2ZSBsYW5ndWFnZS4gKE5vdGUg dGhhdCB3ZSBmb3VuZCB3aXRoIFJGQyA3Nzc2LCBpZiB5b3UgdHJ5IHRvIGxpc3QgZXZlcnkg d2F5IHRoYXQgc29tZW9uZSBjYW4gZ2V0IGl0IHdyb25nIHlvdSBlbmQgdXAgbWlzc2luZyBv dXQgb25lIHRoaW5nIGFuZCB0aGVyZWJ5IGFwcGVhciB0byBjb25kb25lIGl0LikgSSdtIHN1 cmUgeW91IHdhbnQgdG8gY2FsbCBvdXQgbGFuZ3VhZ2UgZm9yIHdoYXQgaXQgaXMsIGJ1dCBJ IHdvdWxkIGNhdXRpb24gdGhhdCB5b3VyIG9iamVjdGl2ZSBpcyB0byByZW1vdmUgdGhlIHVz ZSBvZiBsYW5ndWFnZSB0aGF0IGlzIG9mIGl0c2VsZiByYWNpc3QsIG9yIHRoYXQgZW5nZW5k ZXJzIG9yIHN1cHBvcnRzIHJhY2lzbSwgd2l0aG91dCBpbnNpbnVhdGluZyB0aGF0IHNvbWVv bmUgd2hvIGhhcyB1c2VkIHRoYXQgdGVybSB3aXRob3V0IGtub3dpbmcgYW55IGJldHRlciBp cyBhY3R1YWxseSBhIHJhY2lzdCBwZXJzb24uIFRoYXQgc2VlbXMsIHRvIG1lLCBhIHdob2xl IGRpZmZlcmVudCBkZWJhdGUgdGhhdCBpdCBpcyBub3Qgd29ydGggaGF2aW5nIGFuZCB3aGlj aCB3aWxsIGRpc3RyYWN0IGZyb20gdGhlIHdvcmsgeW91IGFyZSB0cnlpbmcgdG8gZG8uDQo+ IA0KPiBUaGVyZSBpcyBhIGRlbGljYXRlIGJhbGFuY2UgaW4gdGhlIHVzZSBvZiAic29tZSBw ZW9wbGUgbWF5IGZpbmQgdGhpcyBvZmZlbnNpdmUiIGJlY2F1c2Ugd2UgZG8gbmVlZCB0byBh dm9pZCB2aWN0aW0tYmxhbWluZy4gQW5kIG1heWJlIGl0IGlzIG5vdCB0aGUgb2ZmZW5zZSB0 aGF0IGlzIGdpdmVuIHRoYXQgd2UgYWN0dWFsbHkgY2FyZSBhYm91dC4gV2UgY2FyZSBhYm91 dCB0aGUgYnJvYWRlciBpbXBhY3Qgb2YgdGhlIHVzZSBvZiB0aGUgd29yZDogaG93IGl0IHN1 cHJlc3NlcyBwZW9wbGUgZGlyZWN0bHksIGFuZCBob3cgaXQgYnVpbGRzIGEgY3VsdHVyZSBv ciBvdmVydCBvciBzdWJjb25zY2lvdXMgcHJlanVkaWNlLiBTbyB0aGVyZSBtYXkgYmUgb3Ro ZXIgd29yZHMgdGhhdCB3ZSBzaG91bGQgdXNlLiBJbiBmYWN0LCBwZXJoYXBzIHdlIGRvbid0 IHdhbnQgYmxhbWUgaW4gYW55IGRpcmVjdGlvbjogd2UganVzdCB3YW50IHRvIHN0b3AgdXNp bmcgdGhvc2Ugd29yZHMuDQo+IA0KPiAtLS0NCj4gDQo+IFRpdGxlDQo+IA0KPiBJIHdvdWxk IHN1Z2dlc3QgbWFraW5nIGl0IGNsZWFyZXIgdGhhdCB5b3VyIHNjb3BlIGlzIHNwZWNpZmlj YWxseSBkcmFmdHMgYW5kIFJGQ3MuIEkga25vdyBpdCB3b3VsZCBiZSBuaWNlIHRvIGFwcGx5 IGl0IHRvIGV2ZXJ5dGhpbmcsIG9yIGF0IGxlYXN0IGV2ZXJ5dGhpbmcgdGhlIElFVEYgZG9l cywgYnV0IEkgYmVsaWV2ZSBpbiBhY2hpZXZhYmxlIGdvYWxzISBIb3cgYWJvdXQuLi4NCj4g IA0KPiAiVGVybWlub2xvZ3ksIFBvd2VyLCBhbmQgSW5jbHVzaXZlIExhbmd1YWdlIGluIElu dGVybmV0LURyYWZ0cyBhbmQgUkZDcyINCj4gDQo+IC0tLQ0KPiANCj4gQWJzdHJhY3QNCj4g DQo+IENvbnZlcnNlbHkgdG8gdGhlIHByZXZpb3VzIHBvaW50ICjwn5iKKSB0aGUgQWJzdHJh Y3QganVzdCBzYXlzICJSRkNzIi4gSSB0aGluayB3ZSB3YW50IHRoZSBzY29wZSB0byBiZSBJ bnRlcm5ldC1EcmFmdHMuIEluIGZhY3QsIGFsdGhvdWdoIFJGQ3MgYXJlIGEgbWF0dGVyIG9m IHJlY29yZCwgaXQgaXMgcG9zc2libGUgdGhhdCBJLURzIGhhdmUgbW9yZSBlZmZlY3Qgb24g dGhlIGRheS10by1kYXkgbmF0dXJlIG9mIHRoZSBJRVRGLiANCj4gIA0KPiBBbHNvLCBJIGRv bid0IGJlbGlldmUgYXQgdGhpcyBzdGFnZSB5b3Ugc2hvdWxkIHRyeSB0byBjaGFuZ2UgbGFu Z3VhZ2UgaW4gUkZDcyB0aGF0IGhhdmUgYWxyZWFkeSBiZWVuIHB1Ymxpc2hlZC4gSSB0aGlu ayB0aGUgc2NvcGUgb2YgdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCBzaG91bGQgZXhwbGljaXRseSBydWxlIG91 dCBjaGFuZ2luZyBhbnkgcHVibGlzaGVkIFJGQ3MuIA0KPiANCj4gVGhhdCBsZWF2ZXMgbWUg c3VnZ2VzdGluZyB0aGUgQWJzdHJhY3Qgc2hvdWxkIHJlYWQgKGluY2x1ZGluZyBzb21lIGZp eGVzIGZvciBzdHlsZSkuLi4NCj4gIA0KPiBUaGlzIGRvY3VtZW50IGFyZ3VlcyBmb3IgbW92 aW5nIGF3YXkgZnJvbSBjZXJ0YWluIHNwZWNpZmljIGxhbmd1YWdlIGNvbnZlbnRpb25zIHNv bWV0aW1lcyB1c2VkIGJ5IFJGQyBhdXRob3JzIGFuZCB0aGUgUkZDIFByb2R1Y3Rpb24gQ2Vu dHJlIGluIG9yZGVyIHRvIGVuY291cmFnZSB0aGUgdXNlIG9mIG1vcmUgaW5jbHVzaXZlIHRl cm1pbm9sb2d5IGluIEludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0cyB0aGF0IGFyZSB3b3JrIGluIHByb2dyZXNz LCBhbmQgaW4gbmV3IFJGQ3MgdGhhdCBtYXkgYmUgcHVibGlzaGVkIGluIGFueSBvZiB0aGUg UkZDIHNlcmllcy4gVGhlIGRvY3VtZW50IGFsc28gcHJvdmlkZXMgZXhhbXBsZXMgb2YgaW5j bHVzaXZlIHRlcm1pbm9sb2d5IGFzIHByZWNpc2UgYWx0ZXJuYXRpdmVzIGZvciB0aGVzZSBj b252ZW50aW9ucy4NCj4gIA0KPiAtLS0NCj4gIA0KPiBHZW5lcmFsIHBvaW50LiANCj4gIA0K PiBJIGxpa2UgaG93IHlvdSBoYXZlIHVzZWQgcG9zaXRpdmUgbGFuZ3VhZ2UgKGZvciBleGFt cGxlLCBpbiB0aGUgQWJzdHJhY3QpLiBUaGVyZSBpcyBhIGRpZmZlcmVuY2UgKElNTlNITykg b3BpbmlvbiBiZXR3ZWVuICJpbmNsdXNpdmUgdGVybWlub2xvZ3kiIGFuZCAidGVybWlub2xv Z3kgdGhhdCBpcyBub3QgZXhjbHVzaXZlIi4gVGhpcyBtYXkgYmUgcGV0dHkgcGVkYW50cnkg b24gbXkgcGFydCwgb3IgKGFuZCBJJ2QgYmUgaGFwcHkgdG8gYmUgdG9sZCB0aGlzIGlzIHRo ZSBjYXNlKSBpdCBtYXkgYmUgdGhhdCBJIGFtIG5vdCBjb3JyZWN0bHkgYXdhcmUgb2YgdGhl IG51YW5jZXMuDQo+ICANCj4gSSB3b3VsZCBmaW5kIGl0IGdlbnRsZXIgdG8gc2F5ICIuLi5l bmNvdXJhZ2UgdGhlIHVzZSBvZiBsZXNzLWV4Y2x1c2l2ZSB0ZXJtaW5vbG9neS4uLiINCj4g IA0KPiBUaGF0IGlzLCBvdXIgb2JqZWN0aXZlIGlzIHRvIGF2b2lkIGJlaW5nIGV4Y2x1c2l2 ZSwgcmF0aGVyIHRoYW4gdG8gYmUgZXhwbGljaXRseSBpbmNsdXNpdmUuDQo+IA0KPiBMZXQn cyB0YWtlIHRoZSAiYmxhY2tsaXN0IiBleGFtcGxlLiBZb3VyIGFsdGVybmF0aXZlcyBhcmUg YWxsIHJlYXNvbmFibGUsIGJ1dCB0aGV5IGFyZSBub3QgImluY2x1c2l2ZSIuIFRoZSB2ZXJ5 IG5hdHVyZSBvZiB0aGUgbGlzdHMgZGVzY3JpYmVkIGFyZSBleGNsdXNpdmUsIGFuZCB0aGUg YWx0ZXJuYXRpdmUgbmFtZXMgYXJlIG5vdCBjb25zdHJ1Y3RlZCB0byBnaXZlIGEgZmVlbGlu ZyBvZiBpbmNsdXNpb24uIEJ1dCwgdGhlIGFsdGVybmF0aXZlIG5hbWVzICphcmUqIGxlc3Mg ZXhjbHVzaXZlLg0KPiANCj4gTXkgcG9pbnQsIGluIHN1bW1hcnksIGlzIHRvIGZyYW1lIGV2 ZXJ5dGhpbmcgaW4gdGhlIGNvbnRleHQgb2YgImV4Y2x1c2l2ZSIgYW5kICJub3QgZXhjbHVz aXZlIiByYXRoZXIgdGhhbiB1c2luZyAiaW5jbHVzaXZlIi4NCj4gDQo+IC0tLQ0KPiAgDQo+ IEludHJvZHVjdGlvbg0KPiAgDQo+IFlvdSBoYXZlIG5vdCBwcm92aWRlZCBhbiBhdHRyaWJ1 dGlvbiB0byB0aGUgZmlyc3QgcXVvdGUsIHNvIEkgcHJlc3VtZSB0aGF0IHlvdSBhcmUgdGFr aW5nIGl0IGZyb20gdGhlIHNhbWUgc291cmNlIGFzIHRoZSBzZWNvbmQgcXVvdGUgKGkuZS4s IFJGQyA3MzIyKS4gQnV0IHlvdSBoYXZlIGNoYW5nZWQgc29tZXRoaW5nISA3MzIyIHNheXMs ICJUaGUgdWx0aW1hdGUgZ29hbCBvZiB0aGUgUkZDIHB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIHByb2Nlc3MgaXMg dG8gcHJvZHVjZSBkb2N1bWVudHMgdGhhdCBhcmUgcmVhZGFibGUsIGNsZWFyLCBjb25zaXN0 ZW50LCBhbmQgcmVhc29uYWJseSB1bmlmb3JtLiIgSSB0aGluayB0aGF0IG1pZ2h0IGJlIGNv bnNpZGVyZWQgYSBiaXQgbmVhciB0aGUgZWRnZS4NCj4gIA0KPiBZb3UgYXJlIG1pc3Npbmcg YSBjbG9zZSBxdW90ZSBvbiB0aGUgc2Vjb25kIHBhc3NhZ2UgZnJvbSBSRkMgNzMyMg0KPiAg DQo+IFlvdXIgbGFuZ3VhZ2UgaGVyZSBqdW1wcyBhcm91bmQgYSBiaXQgYmV0d2VlbiAiSUVU RiIgYW5kICJJRVRGL0lSVEYiLiBJIHRoaW5rIHlvdXIgdGFyZ2V0IChhcyBJIGV4cHJlc3Nl ZCBpbiBteSBwcm9wb3NlZCBjaGFuZ2VzIHRvIHRoZSBUaXRsZSBhbmQgQWJzdHJhY3QpIGlz IGFsbCBJbnRlcm5ldC1EcmFmdHMgYW5kIFJGQ3MuIFlvdSB3YW50IHRvIGNvdmVyIGFsbCBz dHJlYW1zIGFuZCBhbGwgUkZDcy4NCj4gIA0KPiBUaGUgZmluYWwgcGFyYWdyYXBoIGJhc2lj YWxseSBzYXlzICJXZSBvbmx5IGFjdHVhbGx5IGZvdW5kIHR3byBzZXRzIG9mIHRlcm1zIGlu IHVzZSB0aGF0IG5lZWQgYXR0ZW50aW9uLiIgSXMgdGhhdCByZWFsbHkgdGhlIGNhc2U/IE9y IGlzIHRoaXMganVzdCBhIHN0YXJ0aW5nIHBvaW50IGZvciB0aGlzIGRyYWZ0IHdpdGggdGhl IGFudGljaXBhdGlvbiBvZiBmaW5kaW5nIGZ1cnRoZXIgcHJvYmxlbWF0aWMgdGVybXM/IElm IHlvdSBhcmUgcHJvdmlkaW5nIHNwZWNpZmljcyBmb3IgYWN0aW9uLCBJIHdvdWxkIGRyYWcg cGVyc29uYWwgcHJvbm91bnMgb3V0IG9mICJPdGhlciBDb25zaWRlcmF0aW9ucyIgYW5kIGdp dmUgaXQgaXRzIG93biBzZWN0aW9uIHdpdGggdGhlIHNhbWUgcmVsZXZhbmNlIGFzIGIvdyBh bmQgbS9zLCBhbmQgSSB3b3VsZCBhbHNvIGNhbGwgb3V0IHRlcm1zIGxpa2UgImJsYWNrIGhv bGUiIChpbiB0aGUgc2Vuc2Ugb2Ygd2hlcmUgdHJhZmZpYyBkaXNhcHBlYXJzIHRvKSwgImJs YWNraGF0IiwgYW5kIGV2ZW4gImludmFsaWQiLiBCdXQgdGhpcyBpcyBwYXJ0IG9mIHRoZSBi aWcgcXVlc3Rpb25zIGFib3V0IHRoZSBkb2N1bWVudCdzIGludGVudCAtICppZiogaXQgaXMg eW91ciBpbnRlbnRpb24gdG8gYWRkIG1vcmUgdGVybXMgYXMgeW91IGRvIG1vcmUgd29yayBv biB0aGUgZG9jdW1lbnQsIHRoZW4gc2F5IHNvIHVwIGZyb250LCBpZiwgT1RPSCwgeW91ciBv YmplY3RpdmUgaXMgdG8gZ2V0IHRvIHRoZSByZWNvbW1lbmRhdGlvbnMsIHRoZW4gc2F5IHRo YXQgYW5kIHN0YXRlIHRoYXQgeW91IGFyZSBvbmx5ICJwcm92aWRpbmcgc29tZSBub3RhYmxl IGV4YW1wbGVzLiINCj4gDQo+IEkgaGF0ZSAoaGF0ZSwgaGF0ZSkgSW50cm9kdWN0aW9ucyB0 aGF0IHRlbGwgbWUgd2hhdCBJIGFtIGdvaW5nIHRvIGZpbmQgaW4gZWFjaCBzZWN0aW9uLiBU aGVyZSBpcyBhIFRhYmxlIG9mIENvbnRlbnRzIGZvciB0aGF0LiBJIHRoaW5rIHRoaXMgbWln aHQgYmUgYSBjYXJyeS1vdmVyIGZyb20gd3JpdGluZyBhY2FkZW1pYyBwYXBlcnMgKHdoZXJl IEkgYW0gYWx3YXlzIHRvbGQgb2ZmIGZvciBub3QgaW5jbHVkaW5nIGl0KSwgYW5kIHdoaWxl IGl0IGlzIG5vdCB1bmNvbW1vbiBpbiBJbnRlcm5ldC1EcmFmdHMsIGl0IGZlZWxzIHVubmVj ZXNzYXJ5IGFuZCBhIGJpdCBwZWRhZ29naWNhbC4NCj4gIA0KPiBTbywgYSBzdWdnZXN0ZWQg cmV3cml0ZSBvZiB0aGUgSW50cm9kdWN0aW9uIGlzLi4uDQo+ICANCj4gQWNjb3JkaW5nIHRv IHt7UkZDNzMyMn19LCAiVGhlIHVsdGltYXRlIGdvYWwgb2YgdGhlIFJGQyBwdWJsaWNhdGlv biBwcm9jZXNzIGlzIHRvIHByb2R1Y2UgZG9jdW1lbnRzIHRoYXQgYXJlIHJlYWRhYmxlLCBj bGVhciwgY29uc2lzdGVudCwgYW5kIHJlYXNvbmFibHkgdW5pZm9ybSwiIGFuZCBvbmUgZnVu Y3Rpb24gb2YgdGhlIFJGQyBFZGl0b3IgaXMgdG8gIltjXW9ycmVjdCBsYXJnZXIgY29udGVu dC9jbGFyaXR5IGlzc3VlczsgZmxhZyBhbnkgdW5jbGVhciBwYXNzYWdlcyBmb3IgYXV0aG9y IHJldmlldy4iIERvY3VtZW50cyB0aGF0IGFyZSBwdWJsaXNoZWQgYXMgUkZDcyBhcmUgZmly c3Qgd29ya2VkIG9uIGFzIEludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0cy4NCj4gIA0KPiBHaXZlbiB0aGUgaW1w b3J0YW5jZSBvZiBjb21tdW5pY2F0aW9uIGJldHdlZW4gcGVvcGxlIGRldmVsb3BpbmcgSW50 ZXJuZXQgc3RhbmRhcmRzIGFuZCByZWxhdGVkIGRvY3VtZW50cywgaXQgaXMgd29ydGggY29u c2lkZXJpbmcgdGhlIGVmZmVjdHMgb2YgdGVybWlub2xvZ3kgdGhhdCBoYXMgYmVlbiBpZGVu dGlmaWVkIGFzIGV4Y2x1c2lvbmFyeS4gVGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudCBhcmd1ZXMgdGhhdCBjZXJ0 YWluIG9idmlvdXNseSBleGNsdXNpb25hcnkgdGVybXMgc2hvdWxkIGJlIGF2b2lkZWQgYW5k IHJlcGxhY2VkIHdpdGggYWx0ZXJuYXRpdmVzLg0KPiAgDQo+IFRoaXMgZG9jdW1lbnQgcHJl c2VudHMgYXJndW1lbnRzIGZvciB3aHkgZXhjbHVzaW9uYXJ5IHRlcm1zIHNob3VsZCBiZSBh dm9pZGVkIGluIEludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0cyBhbmQgUkZDcywgZGVzY3JpYmVzIHRoZSBwcm9i bGVtcyBpbnRyb2R1Y2VkIGJ5IHNvbWUgc3BlY2lmaWMgdGVybXMsIGFuZCBwcm9wb3NlcyBh bHRlcm5hdGl2ZSBsYW5ndWFnZS4gVGhlIHRlcm1zIGRpc2N1c3NlZCBpbiB0aGlzIGRvY3Vt ZW50IGluY2x1ZGUgIm1hc3Rlci1zbGF2ZSIgYW5kICJ3aGl0ZWxpc3QtYmxhY2tsaXN0Ii4N Cj4gDQo+IEFjY2VwdGVkIGFuZCBpbnNlcnRlZCwgd2l0aCBzbWFsbCBjaGFuZ2UgYXQgdGhl IGVuZC4NCj4gDQo+IC0tLQ0KPiAgDQo+IFRlcm1pbm9sb2d5DQo+ICANCj4gSSB0aGluayB5 b3Ugb25seSB1c2UgdGhlIHNwZWNpYWwgdGVybWlub2xvZ3kgaW4gdGhlICJSZWNvbW1lbmRh dGlvbnMiIHNlY3Rpb24uDQo+IFRoaXMgaXMgYW4gSW5mb3JtYXRpb25hbCBkb2N1bWVudCBh bmQgeW91IGFyZSBtYWtpbmcgcmVjb21tZW5kYXRpb25zLiBUaGF0IG1ha2VzIHRoZSB1c2Ug b2YgMjExOSBsYW5ndWFnZSBhIGJpdCBpZmZ5LiANCj4gSSB3b3VsZCBzdWdnZXN0IGRyb3Bw aW5nIHRoaXMgc2VjdGlvbiBhbmQgdXNpbmcgbG93ZXIgY2FzZSBpbiB0aGUgIlJlY29tbWVu ZGF0aW9ucyIgc2VjdGlvbiwgYnV0IGl0J3Mgbm90IGEgYmlnIGRlYWwuDQo+IA0KPiAtLS0N Cj4gIA0KPiBUZXJtaW5vbG9neSBhbmQgUG93ZXIgYXQgdGhlIElFVEYNCj4gIA0KPiBBZ2Fp biwgSSdkIGxpa2UgeW91IHRvIGNvbnNpZGVyIHdoZXRoZXIgeW91IGFyZSB0YXJnZXRpbmcg dGhlIElFVEYgb3IgIkludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0cyBhbmQgUkZDcyIuDQo+ICANCj4gU29tZXRp bWVzIHdoZXJlIHlvdSBoYXZlICJSRkNzIiB5b3Ugc2hvdWxkIGhhdmUgIkludGVybmV0LURy YWZ0cyBhbmQgUkZDcyIuIFdoZXJlIHlvdSBhcmUgdGFsa2luZyBhYm91dCBhY3Rpb25zIGJ5 IHRoZSBSRkMgRWRpdG9yLCB0aGVuIHN1cmUsIHRoYXQgb25seSBhcHBsaWVzIHRvICJuZXcg UkZDcyIsIGJ1dCBzdXJlbHkgd2Ugd2FudCBhdXRob3JzIHRvIGFjdCBhcyB3ZWxsPw0KPiAN Cj4gSSBjb25mZXNzIEkgd291bGQgbm90IGhhdmUgd3JpdHRlbiB0aGlzIHNlY3Rpb24gaW4g dGhpcyB3YXkuIEJ1dCB0aGF0IGlzIHBlcnNvbmFsIHN0eWxlLiBMZXQgbWUsIGhvd2V2ZXIs IGZsYWcgYSBmZXcgb2YgdGhlIGx1bXBpZXIgYnVtcHMgZnJvbSBteSBQb1YuDQo+ICANCj4g LSBQYXJhIDEuICJUaGlzIGltcGxpZXMgdGhhdC4uLiIgSSBkb24ndCB0aGluayBpdCBpbXBs aWVzIHdoYXQgeW91IGNsYWltIGl0IGRvZXMuIEl0IHRhbGtzIGFib3V0IHRoZSBnb2FscyBv ZiByaGV0b3JpY2FsIHRoZW9yeSwgbm90IHRoZSBkZXNpcmFiaWxpdHkgb2YgcmhldG9yaWNh bCB0aGVvcnkgb3IgdGhlIG91dGNvbWVzIG9mIGl0cyBnb2Fscy4gQW5kIGFjdHVhbGx5LCBJ IHRoaW5rIG1vc3QgcmVhZGVycyB3aWxsIGJlIGxvc3QgYnkgdGhlIHRpbWUgdGhleSBzZWUg InJoZXRvcmljYWwgdGhlb3J5IjogaXMgdGhpcyBhIGRvY3VtZW50IGFib3V0IHJoZXRvcmlj YWwgdGhlb3J5IG9yIGFib3V0IHRlcm1pbm9sb2d5LCBwb3dlciwgYW5kIGluY2x1c2l2ZSBs YW5ndWFnZSBpbiB0aGUgSW50ZXJuZXQtRHJhZnRzIGFuZCBSRkNzPyBJIHRoaW5rIEkgd291 bGQgc3RyaXAgZnJvbSB0aGUgdG9wIG9mIHRoZSBwYXJhZ3JhcGggZG93biB0byAiSW4gb3Jk ZXIgdG8gZWZmZWN0aXZlbHkgY29tbXVuaWNhdGUuLi4iIE9idmlvdXNseSB0aGF0IG1lYW5z IHlvdSBoYXZlIHRvIGZpeCB1cCAiU2hlIGNvbnRpbnVlcyIuIFtCVFcgSSBzdHVtYmxlZCBv dmVyICJsYW5ndWFnZSB1c2UiLiBUaGUgRW5nbGlzaCBpcyBjb3JyZWN0LCBidXQgbXkgZXll cyB3YW50ZWQgdG8gc2VlICJsYW5ndWFnZSB1c2VkIl0gVGhlIGFsdGVybmF0aXZlIGhlcmUg d291bGQgYmUgdG8gbWFrZSBjbGVhcmVyICp3aHkqIHdlIHNob3VsZCBhcHBseSByaGV0b3Jp Y2FsIHRoZW9yeSBpbiB0aGUgY2FzZSBvZiBSRkNzIGFuZCBJbnRlcm5ldC1EcmFmdHMuDQo+ IA0KPiAtIFBhcmEgMi4gQSBtYWpvciBwcm9ibGVtIHdpdGggdGhlIHRlcm1zICJyYWNpc3Qi IGFuZCAic2V4aXN0IiBpcyB0aGF0IHRoZXkgYXJlIHVuZGVyc3Rvb2QgYnkgbWFueSBwZW9w bGUgdG8gYmUgY29uc2Npb3VzIG9yIHdpbGZ1bCBhY3RzIGZvdW5kZWQgb24gYmVsaWVmcy4g VGhlIGNvbmNlcHQgb2YgaW5ncmFpbmVkIG9yIHVuY29uc2Npb3VzIHJhY2lzbSBhbmQgc2V4 aXNtIGlzIG11Y2ggaGFyZGVyIHRvIGdyYXBwbGUgd2l0aCBmb3IgbW9zdCBwZW9wbGUuIFNl ZSBteSBpbnRyb2R1Y3RvcnkgdGV4dC4gVGhpcyBtYXkgYmUgaGFuZGxlZCBieSBzYXlpbmcg KHBlcmhhcHMgaW4gdGhlIFRlcm1pbm9sb2d5IHNlY3Rpb24pIHNvbWV0aGluZyBsaWtlLCAi V2UgY29uc2lkZXIgdGVybXMgdGhhdCBzZXJ2ZSB0byBvcHByZXNzIG9yIGRpbWluaXNoIHBl b3BsZSwgb3IgdGhhdCB0ZW5kIHRvIHJlaW5mb3JjZSBjb25zY2lvdXMgb3IgdW5jb25zY2lv dXMgcHJlanVkaWNlcyB0byBiZSAncmFjaXN0JyBvciAnc2V4aXN0JyBsYW5ndWFnZSwgYW5k IHdlIHVzZSB0aG9zZSBkZXNjcmlwdGlvbnMgdGhyb3VnaC1vdXQgdGhpcyBkb2N1bWVudC4i DQo+IA0KPiAtIFBhcmEgMyBzL2F2b2lkZWQgYnV0L2F2b2lkZWQsIGJ1dC8NCj4gDQo+IC0g UGFyYSA0IHMvbGluZ3Vpc3RpY3MgYW5kIHBvd2VyIGFuZCBhdHRlbXB0cy9saW5ndWlzdGlj cyBhbmQgcG93ZXIsIGFuZCBhdHRlbXB0cy8NCj4gIA0KPiAtIFBhcmEgNCAiYXR0ZW1wdHMg dG8gJy4uLnByb21vdGUgYXdhcmVuZXNzIHRoYXQgbWF5IGxlYWQgdG8gZXZlbnR1YWwgd2lk ZS1zcHJlYWQgY2hhbmdlIiB7e0Jyb2RpZUdyYXZlc0dyYXZlc319Jy4gSSB0aGluayB0aGF0 IHlvdSBhcmUgZG9pbmcgbW9yZSB0aGFuIHByb21vdGluZyBhd2FyZW5lc3MgaW4geW91ciAi UmVjb21tZW5kYXRpb25zIiBzZWN0aW9uLiBNYXliZSAnLi4uYXR0ZW1wdHMgdG8gInByb21v dGUgYXdhcmVuZXNzIHRoYXQgbWF5IGxlYWQgdG8gZXZlbnR1YWwgd2lkZS1zcHJlYWQgY2hh bmdlIiB7e0Jyb2RpZUdyYXZlc0dyYXZlc319IGFuZCBzdWdnZXN0cyBmaXJzdCBzdGVwcyBm b3IgYWN0aW9ucyB0aGF0IG1heSByZW1lZHkgdGhlIGluYWR2ZXJ0ZW50IHVzZSBvZiB1bmRl c2lyYWJsZSB0ZXJtcycuDQo+IA0KPiAtIFBhcmEgNCBzL1RvIHRoYXQgZWZmZWN0LCBiZWxv dyBpcyBhIHRlcnNlbHkgd3JpdHRlbiBsaXN0L1RvIHRoYXQgZW5kLCB0aGUgbGlzdCBiZWxv dyBpcyBhIHRlcnNlbHkgd3JpdHRlbiBzZXQvDQo+IA0KPiAtIFBhcmEgNCAgQSBwZWRhbnQg YXNrczogQXJlIHdlIHJlYWxseSBvbmx5IHdvcnJpZWQgYWJvdXQgIm9mZmVuc2l2ZSBtZXRh cGhvcnMiLiBBY3R1YWxseSwgcGxlYXNlIHNheSAibWV0YXBob3JzIHRoYXQgbWF5IGNhdXNl IG9mZmVuc2UiIHNpbmNlIChhZ2FpbikgdGhlIHF1ZXN0aW9uIG9mIGludGVudCBhbmQgc3Vi amVjdGl2ZSB2cyBvYmplY3RpdmUgb2ZmZW5zZSBpcyBiZXN0IGF2b2lkZWQgaW4gdGhpcyBj b21tdW5pdHkuIEJ1dCBhbnl3YXksIG15IHBvaW50IHdhcywgd2hhdCBhYm91dCBzaW1pbGVz PyBBbmQgaW5kZWVkLCBpcyAiYmxhY2tsaXN0IiBldmVuIGEgbWV0YXBob3IgKHJhdGhlciB0 aGFuIGEgbWV0YXBob3JpY2FsIGNvbnN0cnVjdCkgLSBpdCdzIG5vdCBhcyB0aG91Z2ggdGhl cmUgaXMgc3VjaCBhIHRoaW5nIGFzIGEgYmxhY2sgbGlzdCBhbmQgd2UgaGF2ZSBzdG9sZW4g dGhlIHRlcm0uIFBlcmhhcHMganVzdCBzdGljayB3aXRoICJ0ZXJtIiBhbmQgImxhbmd1YWdl Ii4gW0JUVywgdGhpcyBvcGVucyB1cCBhbm90aGVyIHRvcGljIG9mIGRpc2N1c3Npb24gdGhh dCBjb3VsZCBlYXNpbHkgYmUgYSByYXQtaG9sZSAob29wcywgdGhlcmUncyBhIG1ldGFwaG9y KTogdGhlIHVzZSBvZiBtZXRhcGhvcnMgaW4gYW55IGNyb3NzLWN1bHR1cmFsIG9yIHRlY2hu aWNhbCBjb21tdW5pY2F0aW9uIHRlbmRzIHRvIGJlIHBvb3Igc3R5bGUgYW5kIHNob3VsZCBi ZSBhdm9pZGVkLiBXaGlsZSBpdCB3b3VsZCBiZSBncmVhdCB0byBzZWUgb3VyIHN0eWxlIGd1 aWRlIHJlY29tbWVuZGluZyBhZ2FpbnN0IHRoZSB1c2Ugb2YgbWV0YXBob3JzIGluIGdlbmVy YWwsIEkgZG9uJ3QgdGhpbmsgdGhpcyBpcyB0aGUgb2JqZWN0aXZlIG9mIHRoaXMgcGllY2Ug b2Ygd29yay5dDQo+ICANCj4gLSBQYXJhIDQgImVuY291cmFnZWQgdG8gY29ycmVjdCBsYXJn ZXIgY29udGVudCBhbmQgY2xhcml0eSBpc3N1ZXMgd2l0aCByZXNwZWN0IHRvIG9mZmVuc2l2 ZSBtZXRhcGhvcnMiDQo+ICAgICAgIC0gV2hhdCBkb2VzICJsYXJnZXIiIG1lYW4/IElzbid0 IGl0IHVubmVjZXNzYXJpbHkgc3ViamVjdGl2ZT8NCj4gDQo+IC0gYnVsbGV0IDQgRG8gd2Ug aGF2ZSB0byBoYXZlICJnZW5kZXItbm9uLWNvbmZvcm1pbmciPyBCeSBzdWdnZXN0aW5nIHRo YXQgdGhpcyBib3RoIGEgcmVxdWlyZW1lbnQgdG8gY29uZm9ybSBhbmQgc29tZSBzaXR1YXRp b24gdGhhdCBpcyAibm9ybWFsIiBpdCBpcywgaXRzZWxmLCBhbiBvZmZlbnNpdmUgdGVybSB3 aGVyZSBJIGNvbWUgZnJvbS4gSSBzdHJ1Z2dsZSB0byBmaW5kIHRoZSBjb3JyZWN0IHRlcm0g dG8gdXNlIGhlcmUsIGJ1dCBteSBhZHZpY2Ugd291bGQgYmUgdGhhdCB3aGVyZSB0aGUgc2hv cnQgdGVybSBpcyBkaWZmaWN1bHQsIGl0IGlzIGJldHRlciB0byB1c2UgbW9yZSB3b3JkcyB0 byBkZXNjcmliZSB0aGUgc2l0dWF0aW9uLiBJIGNvdWxkIG9ubHkgY29tZSB1cCB3aXRoICJw ZW9wbGUgd2hvIG1ha2UgdGhlaXIgb3duIGNob2ljZSBhcyB0byB0aGVpciBnZW5kZXIgcmVw cmVzZW50YXRpb24iIGFuZCBJJ20gbm90IHNhdGlzZmllZCB3aXRoIHRoYXQuDQo+ICANCj4g LS0tDQo+ICANCj4gTWFzdGVyIFNsYXZlDQo+IA0KPiBJIGZvdW5kIHBhcmEgMyB2ZXJ5IGlu dGVyZXN0aW5nIGFuZCwgZXJtLCBzdGltdWxhdGluZy4gQnV0IGlzIGl0IHRoZSBkaXNjdXNz aW9uIHlvdSB3YW50IHRvIGhhdmUgaGVyZT8gSWYgSSBjYW4gYXJndWUgYWJvdXQgd2hldGhl ciAidGhlIHJvbGUgb2YgdGhlIG1hc3RlciB3YXMgdG8gYWJkaWNhdGUiIHdhcyBhbnl0aGlu ZyBvdGhlciB0aGFuIHNhcmNhc20sIHRoZW4gSSBhbSBhcmd1aW5nIGFib3V0IHRoZSB3cm9u ZyB0b3BpYy4gV2h5IGdpdmUgbWUgdGhhdCBvcHBvcnR1bml0eT8gRG8geW91IG5lZWQgdGhp cyBwYXJhZ3JhcGg/DQo+ICANCj4gLS0tDQo+IA0KPiBNYXN0ZXIgU2xhdmUNCj4gIA0KPiBU aGUgZmluYWwgcGFyYWdyYXBoIG9mIHRoaXMgc2VjdGlvbiBpcyBzdHJpa2luZyBhbmQgdHJ1 ZS4gRG9lcyBpdCBiZWxvbmcgaGVyZSAoaXQgaXMgbm90IGluIGFueSB3YXkgc3BlY2lmaWMg dG8gdGhlIE1hc3RlciBTbGF2ZSBpc3N1ZSkgb3Igc2hvdWxkIGJlIGZ1cnRoZXIgdXAgdGhl IGRvY3VtZW50IHdoZXJlIHlvdSBjYW4gdXNlIGl0IHRvIHNldCBjb250ZXh0IHRoYXQgdGhl cmUgaXMgd29yayBuZWVkZWQuIEluZGVlZCwgaW4gdGhpcyBwYXJhZ3JhcGggeW91IHByb3Zp ZGUgYSBxdW90ZSBhYm91dCBQQyBhbmQgbWlub3JpdGllcywgYnV0IHlvdSBzdGF0ZSBzcGVj aWZpY2FsbHkgdGhhdCB0aGlzIGlzIHJhY2lzbS4gSXQgbWF5IGJlLCBidXQgdGhlIHF1b3Rl IGFwcGVhcnMgdG8gYmUgbW9yZSBnZW5lcmFsIGFuZCBvbmUgdGhhdCBuZWVkcyB0byBiZSB1 c2VkIHRvIGNvdmVyIHRoZSB3aG9sZSBkb2N1bWVudC4gT3IgcGVyaGFwcyBpdCBzaG91bGQg YmUgaW4gYm90aCBwbGFjZXMuDQo+IA0KPiAtLS0NCj4gIA0KPiBTdWdnZXN0ZWQgQWx0ZXJu YXRpdmVzICh0byBNYXN0ZXIgU2xhdmUpDQo+ICANCj4gQnV0IHMvYWx0ZXJuYXRpdmVzIGZv ciB0aGUgbWFzdGVyLXNsYXZlIHJlbGF0aW9uc2hpcC9hbHRlcm5hdGl2ZXMgZm9yIHRoZSB0 ZXJtIG1hc3Rlci1zbGF2ZS8NCj4gIA0KPiBJIHdvdWxkIHN0cm9uZ2x5IHN1Z2dlc3QgdG8g cmVtb3ZlIGZyb20gdGhpcyBsaXN0IGFueSBzdWdnZXN0aW9ucyB0aGF0IGFyZSBhbHNvIG1l dGFwaG9ycyB0aGF0IGhhdmUgb3ZlcnRvbmVzIHRoYXQgYXJlIG5vdCBoZWxwZnVsOg0KPiAg LSBMZWFkZXItZm9sbG93ZXINCj4gIC0gQ29vcmRpbmF0b3Itd29ya2VyDQo+ICAtIFBhcmVu dC1oZWxwZXINCj4gDQo+IFRoZSBwZW51bHRpbWF0ZSBwYXJhZ3JhcGggaXMgY29uZnVzaW5n IHRvIG1lLg0KPiAiU2luY2UgdGhlIHVzZSBvZiBtYXN0ZXItc2xhdmUgaXMgYmVjb21pbmcg bGVzcyBjb21tb24gaW4gb3RoZXIgdGVjaG5pY2FsIGNvbW11bml0aWVzLCBpdCBpcyBiZXN0 IHRvIHNpbXBseSBkdXBsaWNhdGUgdGhlIG1ldGFwaG9yIGJlaW5nIHVzZWQgYnkgY29tcGFy YWJsZSBvciBpbnRlcm9wZXJhYmxlIHRlY2hub2xvZ2llcy4gTGlrZXdpc2UsIHRoZSBJRVRG IGNhbiBzaG93IHBvc2l0aXZlIGxlYWRlcnNoaXAgaW4gdGhlIHRlY2huaWNhbCBjb21tdW5p dHkgYnkgc2V0dGluZyBzdGFuZGFyZHMgd2l0aG91dCB1c2luZyBvZmZlbnNpdmUgbWV0YXBo b3JzLiINCj4gICAgLSBXaHkgd291bGQgeW91IGR1cGxpY2F0ZSBhIG1ldGFwaG9yPyBXaHkg bm90ICIuLi5zdWJzdGl0dXRlIHRoZSB0ZXJtIGJlaW5nIHVzZWQuLi4iDQo+ICAgIC0gV2hh dCBkb2VzICJMaWtld2lzZSIgbWVhbiBpbiB0aGlzIGNvbnRleHQ/DQo+IA0KPiAtLS0NCj4g DQo+IE90aGVyIENvbnNpZGVyYXRpb25zDQo+ICANCj4gIkFzIHdlIGhhdmUgc2VlbiwiIGlz IG9uZSBvZiB0aG9zZSBzdHlsZSB0aGluZ3MgdGhhdCBJIHRoaW5rIHNob3VsZCBiZSBhdm9p ZGVkIC0gV2hvIGFyZSB3ZT8gV2VyZSB3ZSBwYXlpbmcgYXR0ZW50aW9uPw0KPiBQZXJoYXBz ICJBcyBkZXNjcmliZWQgaW4gdGhlIHByZWNlZGluZyBzZWN0aW9ucywiDQo+IA0KPiAtLS0N Cj4gIA0KPiBPdGhlciBDb25zaWRlcmF0aW9ucw0KPiANCj4gImxpa2UgYWxsIHdyaXR0ZW4g dGV4dCwiIERvIHlvdSBtZWFuIHRvIGRpc3Rpbmd1aXNoIGZyb20gb3RoZXIgdXNlcyBvZiBs YW5ndWFnZT8gSXMgaXQgT0sgZm9yIG1lIHRvIHNheSAiYmxhY2tsaXN0IiBhdCB0aGUgbWlj IGluIGFuIElFVEYgbWVldGluZyBzbyBsb25nIGFzIEkgZG9uJ3Qgd3JpdGUgaXQgaW4gbXkg SS1EPw0KPiAgDQo+IC0tLQ0KPiAgDQo+IE90aGVyIENvbnNpZGVyYXRpb25zDQo+IA0KPiAi V2UgcHJvcG9zZSBub3RoaW5nIG1vcmUgdGhhbiBhZGRpdGlvbmFsIGNhcmUgaW4gdGhlIGNo b2ljZSBvZiBsYW5ndWFnZSBqdXN0IGFzIGNhcmUgaXMgdGFrZW4gaW4gZGVmaW5pbmcgc3Rh bmRhcmRzIGFuZCBwcm90b2NvbHMgdGhlbXNlbHZlcy4iDQo+ICANCj4gVGhpcyB3b3VsZCBi ZSBhIHdvbmRlcmZ1bCB0aGluZyB0byBzYXkgaW4gdGhlIEludHJvZHVjdGlvbi4gSXQgaXMg YSBncmVhdCB3YXkgdG8gZGVmdXNlIHRoZSByZWFkZXIncyBwcmVjb25jZXB0aW9ucy4NCj4g DQo+IC0tLQ0KPiANCj4gT3RoZXIgQ29uc2lkZXJhdGlvbnMNCj4gDQo+ICJUaGUgYWJvdmUg dHdvIGV4YW1wbGVzIGFyZSBub3QgZXhoYXVzdGl2ZSwgbm9yIGFyZSB0aGV5IG1lcmUgZXhh bXBsZXMgYW5kIHJlcXVpcmUgYWN0aW9uIg0KPiAgDQo+IFRoZSBmYWN0IHRoYXQgeW91IGFy ZSAianVzdCBwcm92aWRpbmcgdHdvIGV4YW1wbGVzIiB3YXMgbG9zdCBvbiBtZSAoaGVuY2Ug c29tZSBvZiBteSBlYXJsaWVyIGJ1cmJsaW5nKS4gSXQgd291bGQgYmUgcmVhbGx5IGhlbHBm dWwgaWYgdGhlIEludHJvZHVjdGlvbiAoYW5kIG1heWJlIGV2ZW4gdGhlIEFic3RyYWN0KSB3 YXMgdmVyeSBjbGVhciB0aGF0Og0KPiAgLSBvdXIgbWFpbiBvYmplY3RpdmUgaXMgdG8gZXN0 YWJsaXNoIHRoZSBuZWNlc3NpdHkgZm9yIGFjdGlvbiBhbmQgdG8gcHJvcG9zZSBhY3Rpb25z DQo+ICAtIHdlIGRvIHRoaXMgYnkgcHJvdmlkaW5nIHR3byBzaWduaWZpY2FudCBleGFtcGxl cyB0aGF0IG5lZWQgYXR0ZW50aW9uIGltbWVkaWF0ZWx5LCBidXQgdGhpcyBpcyBub3QgYSBj b21wbGV0ZSBsaXN0IGFuZCB0aGVyZSB3aWxsIGJlIG1hbnkgb3RoZXIgdGVybXMgdGhhdCBu ZWVkIHRvIGJlIGNvbnNpZGVyZWQuDQo+ICANCj4gVGhhdCBzYWlkLCBJIHRoaW5rIHlvdXIg dGV4dCBoZXJlIGlzIGEgbGl0dGxlIGhhcmQgdG8gcmVhZC4gUGVyaGFwcy4uLg0KPiAiVGhl IHR3byBleGFtcGxlcyBwcm92aWRlZCBhYm92ZSBhcmUgbm90IHRoZSBvbmx5IGNhc2VzIG9m IG9mZmVuc2l2ZSBsYW5ndWFnZSB0byBiZSBhdm9pZGVkLCBhbmQgbWFueSBtb3JlIGNhbiBi ZSBjb2xsZWN0ZWQuIEhvd2V2ZXIsIHRoZXNlIHR3byBleGFtcGxlcyBhcmUgcGFydGljdWxh cmx5IHNpZ25pZmljYW50IGFuZCByZXF1aXJlIGltbWVkaWF0ZSBhY3Rpb24uIg0KPiAgDQo+ IC0tLQ0KPiAgDQo+IE90aGVyIENvbnNpZGVyYXRpb25zDQo+IA0KPiBzL0hvd2V2ZXIsIHdl L1dlLw0KPiANCj4gLS0tDQo+ICANCj4gT3RoZXIgQ29uc2lkZXJhdGlvbnMNCj4gIA0KPiAi VGhhdCBzb21lIG9mIHRoZXNlIG1ldGFwaG9ycyBhcmUgb2ZmZW5zaXZlIGxlYXZlcyBubyBl eGN1c2VzIGZvciB0aGVpciBjb250aW51ZWQgdXNlLiIgVGhlcmUgaXMgYW1iaWd1aXR5IGlu IHRoZSBFbmdsaXNoIGhlcmUgdGhhdCB5b3UgKnJlYWxseSogd2FudCB0byBhdm9pZCEgSG93 IGFib3V0Li4uDQo+ICJJZiBhbnkgb2YgIHRoZXNlIG1ldGFwaG9ycyBpcyBvZmZlbnNpdmUg dGhlcmUgaXMgbm8gZXhjdXNlIGZvciBpdHMgY29udGludWVkIHVzZS4iDQo+IA0KPiAtLS0N Cj4gIA0KPiBPdGhlciBDb25zaWRlcmF0aW9ucw0KPiANCj4gJ0EgdGVybSBsaWtlICJtYW4t aW4tdGhlLW1pZGRsZSIgaXMgbm90IHRlY2huaWNhbGx5IHVzZWZ1bC4gSXQgaXMgbm90IGEg c3RhbmRhcmQgdGVybSwgbm90IGFzIGNsZWFyIGFzIGl0cyBhbHRlcm5hdGl2ZSAib24tcGF0 aCBhdHRhY2tlciIsIGFuZCBzaG91bGQgdGhlcmVmb3JlIGJlIGF2b2lkZWQnDQo+ICANCj4g QWN0dWFsbHksIEkgdGhpbmsgaXQgaXMgd2F5IGNsZWFyZXIgdGhhbiAib24tcGF0aCBhdHRh Y2tlciIgZm9yIHR3byByZWFzb25zOg0KPiAxLiBJdCBpcyBzbyB3aWRlbHkgdXNlZCBhcyB0 byBoYXZlIGluc3RhbnQgcmVjb2duaXRpb24NCj4gMi4gT24tcGF0aCBoYXMgdG8gYmUgdGhv dWdodCBhYm91dCBiZWNhdXNlIGFuIGF0dGFjayBtYXkgaW5jbHVkZSBkaXZlcnRpbmcgdGhl IG1lc3NhZ2Ugb2ZmIGl0cyBpbnRlbmRlZCBwYXRoDQo+ICANCj4gU28sIHRvIGF2b2lkIHRo ZXNlIGRpc2N1c3Npb25zIHdlIG5lZWQgdG8gZm9jdXMgb24gdGhlIGlzc3VlIG5vdCB0aGUg ZGViYXRlIG92ZXIgd2hldGhlciBpdCBpcyB1c2VmdWwuIEknZCBldmVuIHNheSBibGFjay1s aXN0IGlzIHVzZWZ1bCENCj4gIA0KPiBPaCwgYW5kIEkgYXNzdW1lIHlvdSBhY3R1YWxseSBt ZWFuIHRoZSB0ZXJtICJtYW4taW4tdGhlLW1pZGRsZSIgbm90IGEgdGVybSBsaWtlIGl0IQ0K PiAgDQo+IEhvdyBhYm91dC4uLg0KPiBGb3IgZXhhbXBsZSwgdGhlIHRlcm0gIm1hbi1pbi10 aGUtbWlkZGxlIiBoYXMgbm90IGJlIGV4cGxpY2l0bHkgc3RhbmRhcmRpc2VkLCBhbmQgc2hv dWxkIGJlIHJlcGxhY2VkIHdpdGggYW4gYWx0ZXJuYXRpdmUgc3VjaCBhcyAib24tcGF0aCBh dHRhY2tlciIgd2l0aG91dCBmZWFyIG9mIGxvc3Mgb2YgbWVhbmluZy4NCj4gDQo+IC0tLQ0K PiAgDQo+IE90aGVyIENvbnNpZGVyYXRpb25zDQo+IA0KPiAidG8gZW1wbG95IHRoZSB1c2Ug b2YgbWV0YXBob3JzIG9yIHRvIHBhcnJvdCB0ZXJtcyBvZiBhcnQiDQo+ICANCj4gVW5pbnRl bnRpb25hbCBqb2tlPw0KPiAiVG8gcGFycm90IiBpcyBtZXRhcGhvcmljYWwgY29uc3RydWN0 IHRoYXQgeW91IGNhbiByZXBsYWNlIHdpdGggInVudGhpbmtpbmdseSByZXBlYXQiDQo+IA0K PiAtLS0NCj4gDQo+IE90aGVyIENvbnNpZGVyYXRpb25zDQo+IA0KPiAiV2Ugd2VsY29tZSBh ZGRpdGlvbmFsIGV4YW1wbGVzIG9mIHRlcm1pbm9sb2d5IHRoYXQgbWlnaHQgYmUgYXZvaWRl ZCB0aHJvdWdoIG1vcmUgYXdhcmVuZXNzIGFuZCB0aG91Z2h0ZnVsbmVzcy4iDQo+IA0KPiBJ J20gbm90IHN1cmUgd2hhdCB5b3VyIGludGVudGlvbiBpcyBoZXJlLiBEbyB5b3Ugd2FudCBh IGdyb3dpbmcgbGlzdCB3aXRoIG1vcmUgZXhhbXBsZXM/IENyZWF0aW5nIHN1Y2ggYSBsaXN0 IGNhdXNlcyBwZW9wbGUgdG8gYXNzdW1lIHRoYXQgaXRlbXMgbm90IG9uIHRoZSBsaXN0IHJl bWFpbiBhY2NlcHRhYmxlLiBBbmQgSSdtIG5vdCBzdXJlIHRoYXQgbW9yZSBleGFtcGxlcyBh cmUgbmVjZXNzYXJ5IHRvIGV4cGxhaW4geW91ciBtZXNzYWdlLg0KPiANCj4gT24gdGhlIG90 aGVyIGhhbmQsIGNhdGVnb3JpZXMgb2YgbGFuZ3VhZ2UgdG8gYXZvaWQgbWF5IGJlIHVzZWZ1 bC4gWW91IHNwZWNpZmljYWxseSBtZW50aW9uIG1pbGl0YXJ5IGxhbmd1YWdlLCBhbmQgSSB0 aGluayB0aGF0IGlzIGEgZ29vZCBjYXRlZ29yeSB0byBhdm9pZC4gSSBhbHNvIHRoaW5rIHRo YXQgdGhlIHVzZSBvZiBzcG9ydGluZyBsYW5ndWFnZSBpcyB2ZXJ5IHByb2JsZW1hdGljICh0 b3VjaGluZyBiYXNlLCBzdHJpa2luZyBvdXQsIG5vdCByZWFjaGluZyBmaXJzdCBiYXNlLCBj b21pbmcgZnJvbSBsZWZ0IGZpZWxkLCBkcm9wcGluZyB0aGUgYmFsbCwgc2NvcmluZywgZ2V0 dGluZyB0aGUgYmFsbCBvdmVyIHRoZSBsaW5lLCBiZWluZyBjYXVnaHQgb3V0KSBiZWNhdXNl IGl0IGlzIGN1bHR1cmFsbHkgYmFzZWQgbWV0YXBob3IgKG9yIHNpbWlsZSkgYW5kIGlzIHBy b2JsZW1hdGljIGluIHRocmVlIHJlbGF0ZWQgYnV0IGRpc3RpbmN0IHdheXM6DQo+IA0KPiAx LiBJdCBpcyBjdWx0dXJhbCBpbXBlcmlhbGlzbSB3aGVyZSB0aGUgcmVhZGVyIGlzIGZvcmNl ZCB0byBhY2tub3dsZWRnZSB0aGUgY3VsdHVyZSBvZiB0aGUgYXV0aG9yLg0KPiAyLiBUaGUg bWVhbmluZyBtYXkgYmUgd2hvbGx5IGxvc3QgYmVjYXVzZSB0aGUgcmVhZGVyIGhhcyBubyBp ZGVhIHdoYXQgdGhlIHRlcm0gbWVhbnMuDQo+IDMuIFRoZSBtZWFuaW5nIG1heSBiZSByZXZl cnNlZCBiZWNhdXNlIHRoZSByZWFkZXIgcGVyZmVjdGx5IHVuZGVyc3RhbmRzIHRoZSB0ZXJt LCBidXQgaW4gdGhlaXIgY3VsdHVyZSB0aGUgbWVhbmluZyBvZiB0aGUgdGVybSBpcyBkaWZm ZXJlbnQuDQo+IA0KPiBJIHRoaW5rIHdlIHNob3VsZCBhdm9pZCB0aGUgZGViYXRlIChwZXIg T3J3ZWxsKSBvZiB3aGV0aGVyIGFsbCBtZXRhcGhvcnMgb3IgaWRpb21zIGFyZSBiYWQuIFRo YXQgY2FuIGJlIGEgZGViYXRlIGZvciBhIHN0eWxlIGd1aWRlIGRpc2N1c3Npb24sIGJ1dCBp dCBpcyBub3QgKnRoaXMqIGRlYmF0ZS4gSG93ZXZlciwgSSB3b3VsZCBsaWtlIHRvIHN0cmVz cyB0aGF0IHRoZSB1c2Ugb2YgbGFuZ3VhZ2UgdGhhdCBpcyBoZWF2aWx5IGN1bHR1cmFsbHkg YmFzZWQsICppcyogZXhjbHVzaW9uYXJ5LCBwdXRzIHBlb3BsZSBvbiB0aGUgb3V0c2lkZSwg YW5kIG1ha2VzIHRoZW0gZmVlbCB1bmNvbWZvcnRhYmxlLiBUaHVzLCB3aXRob3V0IGdvaW5n IGFzIGZhciBhcyAiYWxsIG1ldGFwaG9ycyBhcmUgYmFkIiB3ZSBtaWdodCBlbmNvdXJhZ2Ug YXV0aG9ycyB0byAiY29uc2lkZXIgYXZvaWRpbmcgdGhlIHVzZSBvZiBtZXRhcGhvcnMgdGhh dCByZXF1aXJlIHNwZWNpZmljIGN1bHR1cmFsIGtub3dsZWRnZSBvciB1bmRlcnN0YW5kaW5n LiINCj4gDQo+IExhbmd1YWdlIGlzIGFsd2F5cyBhIHJlcHJlc2VudGF0aW9uIG9mIGEgc3Bl Y2lmaWMgd29ybGQgdmlldywgYW5kIGl0IGlzIHByZWNpc2VseSB0aGUgaW1wb3NpdGlvbiBv ZiBhIHNwZWNpZmljIHdvcmxkIHZpZXcgdGhhdCBjYW4gYmUgaGFybWZ1bC4NCj4gIA0KPiAt LS0NCj4gDQo+IFJlY29tbWVuZGF0aW9ucw0KPiANCj4gIlRvIHN1bW1hcmlzZSwgd2UgaGF2 ZSBidWxsZXRlZCBzb21lIHZlcnkgY29uY3JldGUgYWN0aW9uIHBvaW50cyB0aGF0IGNhbiBi ZSB0YWtlbiBieSBFZGl0b3JzLCByZXZpZXdlcnMgYW5kIEF1dGhvcnMsIGJvdGggcHJlc2Vu dCBhbmQgZnV0dXJlLiINCj4gIA0KPiBJJ2Qgd2FudCB0byBjbGFyaWZ5IHRoYXQgdGhpcyBp cyBmb3Igd29yayBpbiBwcm9ncmVzcyBub3QgZ29pbmcgYmFjayBvdmVyIHRoZSBjYW5vbi4g U28sIHBlcmhhcHMuLi4NCj4gIA0KPiAiVG8gc3VtbWFyaXNlLCB3ZSBoYXZlIGJ1bGxldGVk IHNvbWUgdmVyeSBjb25jcmV0ZSBhY3Rpb24gcG9pbnRzIHRoYXQgY2FuIGJlIHRha2VuIGJ5 IEVkaXRvcnMsIHJldmlld2VycyBhbmQgQXV0aG9ycywgYm90aCBwcmVzZW50IGFuZCBmdXR1 cmUgYXMgdGhleSBkZXZlbG9wIGFuZCBwdWJsaXNoIEludGVybmV0LURyYWZ0cyBhbmQgbmV3 IFJGQ3MuIg0KPiAgDQo+IC0tLQ0KPiANCj4gUmVjb21tZW5kYXRpb25zDQo+IA0KPiBBdXRo b3JzIGJ1bGxldHMgMSBhbmQgMiBhcmUgbWlzc2luZyB4cmVmIGNpdGF0aW9ucyBhdCB0aGUg ZW5kIG9mIHRoZSBsaW5lcy4NCj4gDQo+IC0tLQ0KPiANCj4gUmVjb21tZW5kYXRpb25zDQo+ IA0KPiBGaW5hbCBBdXRob3IgYnVsbGV0IHNheXMgIkNvbnNpZGVyIHJvbGxpbmcgYmFjayB0 ZWNobmljYWwgaGFyZCBjb2Rpbmcgb2YgdGhlaXIgc3RhbmRhcmRzIGltcGxlbWVudGF0aW9u cyB3aXRoIHRoZSBkb2N1bWVudGVkIGtub3dsZWRnZSBhdmFpbGFibGUgb25saW5lIiBhbmQs IHN1cHBvcnRpdmUgdGhvdWdoIEkgYW0sIEkgaGF2ZSBubyBjbHVlIHdoYXQgdGhhdCBpcyBh c2tpbmcgbWUgdG8gZG8hIEkgaGF2ZSBob25lc3RseSB0cmllZCB0byByZWFkIGl0IGEgZG96 ZW4gdGltZXMgYW5kIHdoaWxlIEkgY2FuIGd1ZXNzLCBJIGNhbid0IGFjdHVhbGx5IGV4dHJh Y3QgbWVhbmluZyDimLkNCj4gDQo+IC0tLQ0KPiANCj4gUmVjb21tZW5kYXRpb25zDQo+IA0K PiBJZiBJIHdlcmUgYW4gZWRpdG9yIChvaCwgSSBhbSkgSSB3b3VsZCB3YW50IChuZWVkKSBh IHN0eWxlIHNoZWV0IHRoYXQgY29sbGVjdHMgYWxsIHRlcm1zIHRoYXQgaGF2ZSBiZWVuIGNv bnNpZGVyZWQsIGFuZCBmb3IgZWFjaCB3aGV0aGVyIGl0IGlzIGFjY2VwdGFibGUsIGFuZCBp ZiBub3Qgd2hhdCB0ZXJtcyBJIHNob3VsZCBjb25zaWRlciBpbnN0ZWFkLiBUaGlzIGlzIHBy ZXR0eSBpbXBvcnRhbnQsIGFuZCBJIHRoaW5rIHlvdSBuZWVkIHRvIG1ha2UgdGhhdCBhIHRo aXJkIHJlY29tbWVuZGF0aW9uIGZvciB0aGUgUkZDIEVkaXRvciAoaXQgc2hvdWxkIGJlIHB1 Ymxpc2hlZCwganVzdCBsaWtlIHRoZSBzdHlsZSBndWlkZSBhbmQgdGhlIGFiYnJldmlhdGlv bnMgbGlzdCkuDQo+IA0KPiBUaGVuIEkgd291bGQgcHV0IGFuIGFkZGl0aW9uYWwgZW50cnkg aW4gdGhlIEF1dGhvcnMgbGlzdCB0ZWxsaW5nIHRoZW0gdG8gbG9vayBhdCB0aGUgc3R5bGUg c2hlZXQNCj4gDQo+IC0tLQ0KPiANCj4gUmVjb21tZW5kYXRpb25zDQo+IA0KPiBGaW5hbCBS RkMgZWRpdG9yIGJ1bGxldCBzYXlzICJTdWdnZXN0IHRvIEF1dGhvcnMgdGhhdCBldmVuIHdo ZW4gcmVmZXJlbmNpbmcgb3RoZXIgc3BlY2lmaWNhdGlvbnMgdGhhdCBoYXZlIG5vdCByZXBs YWNlZCBvZmZlbnNpdmUgdGVybWlub2xvZ3kgdGhleSBjb3VsZCBwcm92aWRlIGFub3RoZXIg dGVybSB3aXRoIGEgbm90ZSB0aGF0IHRoZSB0ZXJtIGlzIG9yaWdpbmFsIGFuZCBub3QgYmVp bmcgc3VnZ2VzdGVkIGJ5IHRoZSBBdXRob3IuIiBJIHRoaW5rIHRoZSBtZWFuaW5nIGlzIGxv c3QgYSBsaXR0bGUgYXQgdGhlIGVuZCBiZWNhdXNlIHRoZSAidGVybSIgaXMgbm90IHRoZSAi dGVybSIg8J+Yig0KPiAgDQo+IFBlcmhhcHMuLi4NCj4gIlN1Z2dlc3QgdG8gQXV0aG9ycyB0 aGF0IGV2ZW4gd2hlbiByZWZlcmVuY2luZyBvdGhlciBzcGVjaWZpY2F0aW9ucyB0aGF0IGhh dmUgbm90IHJlcGxhY2VkIG9mZmVuc2l2ZSB0ZXJtaW5vbG9neSwgdGhlIEF1dGhvcnMgY291 bGQgdXNlIGFub3RoZXIgdGVybSBpbiB0aGVpciBkb2N1bWVudCBhbmQgaW5jbHVkZSBhIG5v dGUgdG8gc2F5IHRoYXQgdGhleSBoYXZlIHVzZWQgdGhlIG5ldyB0ZXJtIGFzIGEgcmVwbGFj ZW1lbnQgZm9yIHRoZSB0ZXJtIHVzZWQgaW4gdGhlIHJlZmVyZW5jZWQgZG9jdW1lbnQuIg0K PiANCj4gLS0tDQo+ICANCj4gQWRkaXRpb25hbCBSZWZlcmVuY2VzIE5vdCBDaXRlZCBBYm92 ZQ0KPiANCj4gSSBzdWdnZXN0IHlvdSBjYWxsIHRoaXMgIkZ1cnRoZXIgcmVhZGluZyIgc2lu Y2UgIlJlZmVyZW5jZXMiIGhhcyBhIHNwZWNpZmljIG1lYW5pbmcgcmVsYXRlZCB0byBiZWlu ZyBjaXRlZC4NCj4gDQo+IC0tLQ0KPiANCj4gU2VjdXJpdHkgQ29uc2lkZXJhdGlvbnMNCj4g IA0KPiBJIHdvbmRlciB3aGV0aGVyIHlvdSBjYW4gZG8gYmV0dGVyIHRoYW4gdGhpcy4gQ2Vy dGFpbmx5LCBkb24ndCBjYWxsIHRoaXMgYSAicmVzZWFyY2ggZG9jdW1lbnQiISBIYXZlIGEg dGhpbmsgYWJvdXQgdGhlIGltcGFjdCBvZiB3cm9uZyBsYW5ndWFnZSBvbiBzZWN1cml0eSBh bmQgcHJpdmFjeS4gRG8gcGVvcGxlIHdobyBhcmUgdXBzZXQgYnkgbGFuZ3VhZ2UgcGF5IGxl c3MgYXR0ZW50aW9uIHRvIHRoZSBjb250ZW50PyBJZiB0aGUgY29udGVudCBjb25jZXJucyBz ZWN1cml0eSwgZG9lcyB0aGF0IG1lYW4gc2VjdXJpdHkgbWF5IGJlIGNvbXByb21pc2VkPyBE byB3ZSBub3RpY2UgdGhhdCBzZWN1cml0eSBjb25zaWRlcmF0aW9ucyBvZnRlbiBtYWtlIHVz ZSBvZiBleGFjdGx5IHRoZSBsYW5ndWFnZSB3ZSBhcmUgY29uY2VybmVkIGJ5IGFuZCB0aGF0 IGl0IGlzIGltcG9ydGFudCB0aGF0IHRoZSBzZWN1cml0eSBjb21tdW5pdHkgcGlja3Mgc3Vi c3RpdHV0ZSB0ZXJtcyB0aGF0IGNvbnZleSB0aGUgcmlnaHQgbWVhbmluZyB3aXRoaW4gdGhh dCBjb21tdW5pdHk/DQo+ICANCj4gPT09PT09PQ0KPiANCj4+IERlYXIgYWxsLA0KPj4NCj4+ IEkgaG9wZSB0aGlzIGVtYWlsIGZpbmRzIHlvdSBhbGwgdmVyeSB3ZWxsLiBUaGUgY3VycmVu dCBnbG9iYWwgZGViYXRlDQo+PiBhYm91dCBzeXN0ZW1pYyBhbmQgaW5zdGl0dXRpb25hbCBy YWNpc20gaGFzIGxlZCBzZXZlcmFsIHRlY2hub2xvZ3kNCj4+IGNvbW11bml0aWVzIHRvIHJl Y29uc2lkZXIgdGhlaXIgbGFuZ3VhZ2UgYW5kIHByYWN0aWNlcy4gV2l0aGluIHRoZQ0KPj4g SUVURiB0aGlzIGRpc2N1c3Npb24gaGFzIGJlZW4gb25nb2luZyBmb3IgdGhlIGxhc3QgeWVh cnMuIE1hbGxvcnkgYW5kDQo+PiBJIHRob3VnaHQgd2UgY291bGQgcGVyaGFwcyBjb250cmli dXRlIHRvIHRoaXMgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbiB3aXRoIHRoZQ0KPj4gZm9sbG93aW5nIGRyYWZ0Og0K Pj4NCj4+IGh0dHBzOi8vdG9vbHMuaWV0Zi5vcmcvaHRtbC9kcmFmdC1rbm9kZWwtdGVybWlu b2xvZ3ktMDINCj4+DQo+PiBXZSdyZSBoYXBweSB0byByZWNlaXZlIGNvbW1lbnRzIGFuZCBz dWdnZXN0aW9ucyBvbi1saXN0LCBvZmYtbGlzdCwgDQo+PiBhbmQvb3IgYXMgUFIgaGVyZToN Cj4+DQo+PiBodHRwczovL2dpdGh1Yi5jb20vSVJURi1IUlBDL2RyYWZ0cy9ibG9iL21hc3Rl ci9kcmFmdC10ZXJtaW5vbG9neS5tZA0KPj4NCj4+IExvb2tpbmcgZm9yd2FyZCB0byBkaXNj dXNzIHRoaXMgaGVyZSwgYW5kIHBlcmhhcHMgYXMgd2VsbCBkdXJpbmcNCj4+IElFVEYxMDgu IA0KPj4NCj4+IFdlIGhvcGUgd2UgY2FuIGZpbmQgY29tbXVuaXR5IGNvbnNlbnN1cyBvbiB0 aGlzIHRvcGljLg0KPj4NCj4+IEJlc3QsDQo+Pg0KPj4gTWFsbG9yeSBhbmQgTmllbHMNCj4g DQoNCi0tIA0KTmllbHMgdGVuIE9ldmVyDQpSZXNlYXJjaGVyIGFuZCBQaEQgQ2FuZGlkYXRl IC0gREFUQUNUSVZFIFJlc2VhcmNoIEdyb3VwIC0gVW5pdmVyc2l0eSBvZiBBbXN0ZXJkYW0N ClBvc3Rkb2N0b3JhbCBTY2hvbGFyIChhYmQpIC0gQ29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbnMgRGVwYXJ0bWVu dCAtIFRleGFzIEEmTSBVbml2ZXJzaXR5DQpSZXNlYXJjaCBGZWxsb3cgLSBDZW50cmUgZm9y IEludGVybmV0IGFuZCBIdW1hbiBSaWdodHMgLSBFdXJvcGVhbiBVbml2ZXJzaXR5IFZpYWRy aW5hDQpBc3NvY2lhdGVkIFNjaG9sYXIgLSBDZW50cm8gZGUgVGVjbm9sb2dpYSBlIFNvY2ll ZGFkZSAtIEZ1bmRhw6fDo28gR2V0w7psaW8gVmFyZ2FzDQoNClc6IGh0dHBzOi8vbmllbHN0 ZW5vZXZlci5uZXQNCkU6IG1haWxAbmllbHN0ZW5vZXZlci5uZXQNClQ6IEBuaWVsc3Rlbm9l dmVyDQpQL1MvV0E6ICszMTYyOTA1MTg1Mw0KUEdQOiAyNDU4IDBCNzAgNUM0QSBGRDhBIDk0 ODggNjQzQSAwRUQ4IDNGM0EgNDY4QSBDOEIzDQo= From nobody Tue Jul 14 11:51:08 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B837D3A087C; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 11:51:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.102 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.102 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.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 4fpKEnrSJRxJ; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 11:51:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from EUR01-HE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr130077.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.13.77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14EC43A0878; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 11:50:59 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=EBXtHY54085I3sDL3euBn/D66aZHWMPXyH0OmdSO8oAH/0KU7cyqzAHqZkkBG0Sm++fSdvVJQOmQXTklGeSHXOh30PHZnyS09QDyS4agKX+KmkON4703us9MAhde6QeqWqiWjIo5adjWQ7qCAHPcFacQOt9H18v3HmOlWoe/f0H7jV6Fc/vDessBW93/DmqzMbrKzYATdVwM3gSRAtolbQw2rkz757tZtwNDBd2p22ZEZ/eUjllFXTIrtC+aLKVc8v1YTpgx8BUFkSX7WMOl+Fm6II08LbID0UJMdwzb0iORmZUk90sxuIp2MFhhLOTNZDkwenzYyr+cxhdEZZ7V4Q== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=iMcWkYufmbzXfQv6VVJkHYMheNFlPQC+bOM/TK92U7g=; b=bcG97tZNdLt3tn4R7vTUPwwldJWTZfqYwP40CE+2nkJ6hWKB+WLrGUAZKm/wBH7qUctvvVQZ3pE6iRQJ+MhClJSDdDeerjs8TJByWaiobDzN/LpzkmR+umNSzmm9NQJf+Uq6TVkdURV/VsLrnAQFQap5amCZBJVYjmaRgKPxos8LJW4nwR6UPw1HBcX1TO5GrZNZ/MQjSrqwOuk/vlsptbRJXjeQa6w1zgQ0bdSaL+rRglEST7uPHlaio5yofpyf7dqBzom6sSu5UHX2M3ksfkvzLWGOQdpMkbGee+xs+JCGCNTtV7gUXPJIVDI/tVUKnuAXf28V8gpFhYb4hxSREQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ericsson.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ericsson.com; dkim=pass header.d=ericsson.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ericsson.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=iMcWkYufmbzXfQv6VVJkHYMheNFlPQC+bOM/TK92U7g=; b=URu4cb2Oxidg71RKarYGDMVfNnzH2D0uNUR5svt1+bM8wqPIF+7VI+HUxpiZAOYar7g//ltxcPh7EzPVtEsZczkn/FRivzRpuu6IGSqryRm9fQCQ4TiRM/Dx9aMopGzBU7JxrffV6emNzO1VJI8bI0r0nFXoNqjLkLmy1ZBhhjo= Received: from HE1PR0702MB3818.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:8c::18) by HE1PR0701MB2667.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:3:98::10) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3195.9; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 18:50:55 +0000 Received: from HE1PR0702MB3818.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::a1fa:7949:3b5:b72f]) by HE1PR0702MB3818.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::a1fa:7949:3b5:b72f%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3174.022; Tue, 14 Jul 2020 18:50:55 +0000 From: Francesca Palombini To: "gendispatch@ietf.org" , "ietf@ietf.org" CC: "gendispatch-chairs@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Call for agenda items Gendispatch IETF108 Thread-Index: AQHWWg+0/1YWtYN7Okm3jLgGPu0Kfw== Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 18:50:55 +0000 Message-ID: <7D2271FB-68A4-492B-8B10-CD35CB32163D@ericsson.com> Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-GB X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.37.20051002 authentication-results: ietf.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;ietf.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=ericsson.com; x-originating-ip: [79.12.182.121] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 375a36e9-86ec-48a4-9cd0-08d82826d71a x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: HE1PR0701MB2667: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: dDQz7pXyII07dgP/e5juoQNKRZZT1PxUFeXJW0n8YWlnDkq0FPh84Ya6INRhsvVUxdjRmsf6Ep0E9QWgt0FuvkFuLZHWJfyOnlY/N3myjgTZ083IUsgi3Mj2XFqE56q9q1Z7HqGPf7hotDUgvmhi+5FO+McKI3vAeGKuIZVmpS2MoNwiuwoLczLUY9W2akB8fD8v/sUHBpfRnzSodmB5+0ltGzG+FYwFFx4CHCsx+wOvVVpBVKemdi+aKoYyFb/evb4HBC/uymXrKEaMIP21NmqzTHgyZbkLQQggNQ3+teYXx9QsUjbrpQ39zD5lZFv3bpnkuc5aTzSswNbuVR8SDXjR/b/8NBvGAHxExQW04Fx4vHivBzSP3R1gKSLs7lNn8c0mz+3dnU9+jAkO+0ef+g== x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:HE1PR0702MB3818.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:(4636009)(366004)(36756003)(66946007)(76116006)(6512007)(4326008)(66476007)(66556008)(8936002)(91956017)(6486002)(450100002)(86362001)(966005)(2906002)(83380400001)(6506007)(64756008)(498600001)(66446008)(2616005)(44832011)(71200400001)(186003)(5660300002)(26005)(8676002)(4744005)(110136005)(33656002); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: APWPqT4k2qau03UD/LhMmXCmwRGnML1DtjT1WXWfSwjT9GKz2E2pptBr1tObQJ+hJ2tihx+amMbMV+EHPqh6wddV06c4fUfordLdo2q0chslBstGyvAaMpjr2pYXoF7yKa30uPpHQCxmGdxLiFndSM3vnq5zpT2ptvoIBC0vZTXWI7WFe9t5bSddBjyv/AFV+vHLLo0gV2sJO49bs/8pymio9Ybx17QZ3OGWfFgqE1012i8xT4D6FQWIlNYeVfWk6bl5R/U6MNowuYh1R6ySUQIrPaVCQu1fttZ6+6/KCkhIIh5N24sygv+ifaNcFyXi9JdY0aO4CY6f9XL1AGhqUH5zQg4lWIIguShs5fy2hBzK7xsA0OdKdx2AlfxY4bu8kvVvV3keaKg4Y4tPSXXRcncHPfvzqMnamESwYE8Oy3JAnbwIRWWx4tzXfYQtajTb3jsB9qUySSshTP8fcDPh0HlYfuFCh8yxAVtTpsbYwFQ= x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <87E7FBFBD2BFF947BABA9E9DB3118F4D@eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: HE1PR0702MB3818.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 375a36e9-86ec-48a4-9cd0-08d82826d71a X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 14 Jul 2020 18:50:55.4899 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: dBPM/LoqEbszzj/1QSRwUGvYAFnD/4J1E6/PMK9dLXEVcKkLiEt+sl5Jl+gLxSQ3mxjYWGVQL1TFznB5ZvvEb1A1pbfy1WesdE5V46SwN6lNaFdERhJVmbCI6dcDmjZZ X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HE1PR0701MB2667 Archived-At: Subject: [Gendispatch] Call for agenda items Gendispatch IETF108 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2020 18:51:03 -0000 SGkgYWxsLA0KDQpHZW5kaXNwYXRjaCBoYXMgYmVlbiBzY2hlZHVsZWQgdG8gaGF2ZSBhbiBhbGwg dmlydHVhbCBtZWV0aW5nIG9uIFRodXJzZGF5LCAzMCBKdWx5IDIwMjAsIDEzOjAwLTEzOjUwIFVU Qy4NCg0KVGhlIHNlc3Npb24gd2lsbCBoYXBwZW4gb3ZlciBNZWV0ZWNobywgYW5kIHlvdSB3aWxs IG5lZWQgdG8gcmVnaXN0ZXIgdG8gSUVURiB0byBwYXJ0aWNpcGF0ZS4gRm9yIG1vcmUgaW5mb3Jt YXRpb24gb24gaG93IHRvIHBhcnRpY2lwYXRlOiBodHRwczovL2lldGYub3JnL2hvdy9tZWV0aW5n cy8xMDgvc2Vzc2lvbi1wYXJ0aWNpcGFudC1ndWlkZS8NCg0KV2UgYXJlIHdvcmtpbmcgb24gdGhl IGFnZW5kYSwgYW5kIGN1cnJlbnRseSBoYXZlIDIgaXRlbXMuIElmIHlvdSB3b3VsZCBsaWtlIHRp bWUgb24gdGhlIGFnZW5kYSwgc2VuZCB5b3VyIHJlcXVlc3QgdG8gdGhlIG1haWxpbmcgbGlzdCBh c2FwLiAgSGVscGZ1bCBpdGVtcyB0byBpbmNsdWRlIGluIHlvdXIgcmVxdWVzdCAoaWYga25vd24v YXBwbGljYWJsZSkgYXJlOg0KDQooMSkgcG9pbnRlcnMgdG8gYSBkcmFmdChzKQ0KKDIpIHBvaW50 ZXJzIHRvIG9uZ29pbmcvcHJpb3IgZGlzY3Vzc2lvbnMNCigzKSBwb2ludGVycyB0byBhbnkgb3Ro ZXIgYmFja2dyb3VuZCBtYXRlcmlhbHMNCig0KSBkZXNpcmVkIG5leHQgc3RlcHMNCig1KSBkZXNp cmVkIHRpbWUgZm9yIGRpc2N1c3Npb24NCg0KSWYgbmVlZGVkLCBwcmVjZWRlbmNlIGluIHRoZSBt ZWV0aW5nIHdpbGwgYmUgZ2l2ZW4gdG8gZG9jdW1lbnRzIHRoYXQgaGF2ZSBkZW1vbnN0cmF0ZWQg aW50ZXJlc3QgaW4gdGhlIGZvcm0gb2YgYWN0aXZlIGRyYWZ0cyBhbmQgbWFpbGluZyBsaXN0IGRp c2N1c3Npb24uIElmIHlvdSBoYXZlIHF1ZXN0aW9ucywgcGxlYXNlIHJlYWNoIG91dCB0byB0aGUg Y2hhaXJzLg0KDQpUaGFua3MsDQpGcmFuY2VzY2EgYW5kIFBldGUNCg0K From nobody Tue Jul 21 13:51:25 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3448B3A0A9B; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 13:51:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.102 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.102 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.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 nCsqJ5lmWfhL; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 13:51:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from EUR04-VI1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr80077.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.8.77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 191263A0A96; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 13:51:15 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=T4HT5bEQd4C954q5RzqIuFcm9cAcknjo9sfzY3YSzFUE45RnRpci4xHLju6QrpjOROfnYVBHO5LegvU3ZVZHoW1EYQ6ez2o3dTJxnJatAyjxMTW0pnm6XFojWEvstwT0iA3DBd8Ld2xcZW++WeA02r4qqixWooZbdAMss5fY4XmEDwTqBg/oy5OCovaMf3Lu/yXz+N70fnKl0kaM0GvB6hdf/7uVLbNNVUhB3hw+Qz+/pbdplRHt2/PfhKfU48dD3rNfkFkR46463ZbYgWm63bbRGhN6d4O1/0V63qzCcWGA2vF3NRECAH0Z981Kr5aqtGSMnYMH+JXD4IWlJZySaw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=rKQFHC2QbqVeFNowz9xLlnkRG/ZtFsX5BTNvniviKew=; b=e4VLsWNdy2ZBU8oddo833dTckBBeA3dV4PvAJ9R7/tGAsgIAJvqaa5Ot60X3o2PwP95UChJ4vwwke/egv496Vj+biXynxdZ1Cg3GlAfoeymYhPbXcMG7DvbfOc0SFS3NrO0TYB+Xm6bGu4inE0xw3G2Vuo9cPavOY0jEDcxJjPUv5NraBvNaIX+YLntU9Eu9v2CCxenhRYUVQfelQuDKtrNqflsFacqGM7xx8jMHdc4U9oIKkizM7bwwcrHh8lvnpsPvYubD0CLAVWpL3l6D8lSTSSO+9WLXcKWDBVMUwn6pQjvN2uFWLCujOGTHefYgt0P6MeUQen0cUwxLA2KHIQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ericsson.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ericsson.com; dkim=pass header.d=ericsson.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ericsson.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=rKQFHC2QbqVeFNowz9xLlnkRG/ZtFsX5BTNvniviKew=; b=NvxWbMwH6/vk4lzikhHE2e4Z/Vpv7bFCZBzbgljH/61FRQZIleHa+TLvffdJB1WMU+v4KavRqQNfL7okg9DfXQ/JndYa9/STqb7Fr6JR/9kcjOqvIiGPm5WChpi1kSSXGWBCUyFrQePqm+oQcc4KHtPoRiP46dNKaj52nhtcET8= Received: from HE1PR0702MB3818.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:8c::18) by HE1PR07MB3497.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:2c::28) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3195.16; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:51:12 +0000 Received: from HE1PR0702MB3818.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::a1fa:7949:3b5:b72f]) by HE1PR0702MB3818.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::a1fa:7949:3b5:b72f%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3216.015; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:51:11 +0000 From: Francesca Palombini To: "gendispatch@ietf.org" CC: "gendispatch-chairs@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: IETF 108 Thread-Index: AQHWX6CqZSWkfzE0X0GXQ/kpvYtpOA== Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:51:11 +0000 Message-ID: <11B07916-4F1D-4701-8008-D0F261836228@ericsson.com> Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-GB X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.37.20051002 authentication-results: ietf.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;ietf.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=ericsson.com; x-originating-ip: [79.12.182.121] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 1d4d7e3e-4754-4b6f-27bb-08d82db7cd4d x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: HE1PR07MB3497: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:8882; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: zRpBDrnuVSKIDhAGUM/7PXhNZ9xaEcACT952OdLVDQx0TmTm8c5QQKvMWn/DmhbSMdJQwn7AH2rdZI24MY5XhhySmxdu2GRbE63lb5tyZzZGkTy2QMa+SQxIkJjia619i03h4dRFjLjD+FQOjun3pOUWoj3fW5Gf3vS00fsR0MLSBQHZTb/ugkpumkbsOOsvfZ4+g/kDCVelcHWHhWfGLfsS91+A+ttF85Kyr9YNI219lIR/bVjW18XMrF7nWDjEwOGE5yhH6m6FupNjyiOYcThahdNphE/4aWiG1iw2KpF7rbVv+aQSiEk9OagXpwg01LoL3PrE0E27y/asBEKSUBIy7QCIH7ApmJQN3bgWkw0PNJFUWSEwNjcNdqUCwE3DsSJNEzRafwABaOcF/UTD/g== x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:HE1PR0702MB3818.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:(4636009)(366004)(2906002)(83380400001)(6486002)(36756003)(76116006)(66476007)(33656002)(66946007)(966005)(8936002)(4326008)(6512007)(450100002)(91956017)(86362001)(2616005)(44832011)(6506007)(26005)(66556008)(8676002)(5660300002)(7116003)(186003)(498600001)(4744005)(6916009)(66446008)(64756008)(71200400001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 1i8ddLiutPocCAFqrm9VAwK1Z1ilrt8A/vBX2t+vez4UUcSPyH//izhytGKWk8iuOWv8wlPSkLpFTPU+0KJwhozalcQetmFPfl1rLMqclQc6ssGQrhMmpc1nlYoEQbhdkV7eVFM3+ERvL4GODN39kkrA9+SMbQx65EDIUQEd53pQi11Iz2VPaffPch+002uRMpVdTCC+GP7H6pBUw9CDyYCm31gtkL3mxpYsvTGpPujTJm+Q3fmnn8kVvhCcLTYvRU7VYqkXWi3+3dkmN0abvRk4ANZIwpuvJ4Njfvjm/00jgbI43kfT7YgkTMj2FOtJ2oZxtIaBF+6q9MsaXstSn5OUVRhV+Nl3WtFPQSO24MJJYFbkcLYBhkSY3i9lel9zArXXDl1GYVvHxdXWJkORnASqFYNeYQoWeKW5/wU64ld4tQn5jo0CzIoxhoAJAKn/2nhe95u/vo1AbGbiA4ZjNaDxbmZxnM4lvTykG1qQVKVmA+nAREZG+hEBBstkOFZZ x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: HE1PR0702MB3818.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 1d4d7e3e-4754-4b6f-27bb-08d82db7cd4d X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 21 Jul 2020 20:51:11.8636 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: lb1AJcYce7Os34HVLHnZKpM+zKhhmEskqRjgt5IS2l5pWhqPRK/8oRzkTDxEURS5RvjN//OtmqLfacQCX3Z6FVPtAWYx49RAJMS0dQGRWPHtLOi/6rrw8HNL0bzT8GHU X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HE1PR07MB3497 Archived-At: Subject: [Gendispatch] IETF 108 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:51:24 -0000 SGksDQoNCkFuIGFnZW5kYSBmb3IgdGhlIGNvbWluZyBtZWV0aW5nIGhhcyBiZWVuIHBvc3RlZDog aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvcHJvY2VlZGluZ3MvMTA4L2FnZW5kYS9hZ2VuZGEtMTA4LWdl bmRpc3BhdGNoLTAyIFBsZWFzZSBsZXQgdGhlIGNoYWlycyBrbm93IGlmIHlvdSBoYXZlIGFueSBj b21tZW50Lg0KDQpXZSBhcmUgbG9va2luZyBmb3IgbWludXRlIHRha2VycyBhbmQgamFiYmVyIHNj cmliZS4gUGxlYXNlIGNvbnNpZGVyIHZvbHVudGVlcmluZyBpZiB5b3UgYXJlIHBsYW5uaW5nIHRv IGpvaW4gdGhlIHNlc3Npb24uDQoNClByZXNlbnRlcnM6IHBsZWFzZSBzdWJtaXQgeW91ciBzbGlk ZXMgYXMgZWFybHkgYXMgcG9zc2libGUgYW5kIG5vIGxhdGVyIHRoYW4gU3VuZGF5IDI2dGggb2Yg SnVseSBFT0QuDQoNClRhbGsgdG8geW91IGFsbCBzb29uIQ0KRnJhbmNlc2NhDQoNCg== From nobody Tue Jul 21 13:59:02 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 416C43A0A78; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 13:59:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 bsMNYQ5E3WVK; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 13:58:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pf1-x430.google.com (mail-pf1-x430.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::430]) (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 2B7013A0A6E; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 13:58:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x430.google.com with SMTP id x72so33524pfc.6; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 13:58:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5c/2f5z3LE5vdFsHE+P6KD/7JWsaqRg+UH/Uud1FYko=; b=QghBgwGb5RHeOFm8UyXmtxnUbxAK6vNzP1xuowM+4qHBD4O04GRp4FXKv6KaWP3HpX UbsBgJwRAXg7RhSRyAXmsLqfR7U/FS3jdusWRfT5AbD2RrzTbXlEOxpkEQGKTJagnuMo 665O0cPZkydqL1pqxQC1ixexIT0ccFJBlVVsT+8xMd9H91rXe12lNHepIpYHzCpRTCyf eMbEz4bgR5AQM3oVwNrigOQq6aGLSIrap8hGLAV/NJ/ObD2Iq8s96fhJa/xDT7YKbHQD C7WjAgS159/2UtjzOSvpF9PxdJVGvi4xHdE23VaehOZ5pnZY1UgbSoJ/j81aqn02945N 3X8g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=5c/2f5z3LE5vdFsHE+P6KD/7JWsaqRg+UH/Uud1FYko=; b=CEZnFDS6wulOz+jE5IJ1xNi8TxgU6+Z98iUU2rDbSlPA6YqRumhkL596+ijHum0vXu HQvMcgsEmM24RMHj4cCvvSA0sg5J7x8biweSRXv9PVjBaDylegT6DZqhVzjXxYFDC8nR NAhnEEp18YVgsVu2ejV95Ddh+TysiM9Kaz/kry+kJZV459kxHoC5ISG+Frj5Nm3X34gM QNSkXB9eAnIEW7x69wAmeK5qIcTctqtzI9T/Rdrsa30Zm/YN0v9MQ904REfhGoTbF3ii bEcwaco+sogJPEzAc6JLLteitPr7O7cWppfhxf8MhVfog8FodVYXuI80SIunZ1qkd/ha VDNw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531gW/lHg8exoIEE78KyYmGF8TTKPLOlWrg/THqG5nfpVRgDOVRk VxbUXgOvjJElghCM0DydtexBIqLs X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyvWvNChMX20BLvOMalzUX+fIXVubs3p0PZSZ6jpHeSem4q2KkYrKZM0T09jSsGL3IjVLVm5w== X-Received: by 2002:aa7:8e90:: with SMTP id a16mr24697508pfr.84.1595365138558; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 13:58:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([151.210.139.192]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 9sm20924337pfx.131.2020.07.21.13.58.55 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 21 Jul 2020 13:58:57 -0700 (PDT) To: Francesca Palombini , "gendispatch@ietf.org" Cc: "gendispatch-chairs@ietf.org" , stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie References: <11B07916-4F1D-4701-8008-D0F261836228@ericsson.com> From: Brian E Carpenter Message-ID: Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:58:54 +1200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <11B07916-4F1D-4701-8008-D0F261836228@ericsson.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] IETF 108 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:59:00 -0000 Hi, > Additional Criteria for Nominating Committee Eligibility > > (Brian Carpenter, 15 min) I believe Stephen Farrell will present this, as my plan is to be fast asleep at the time ;-). Regards Brian Carpenter On 22-Jul-20 08:51, Francesca Palombini wrote: > Hi, > > An agenda for the coming meeting has been posted: https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/108/agenda/agenda-108-gendispatch-02 Please let the chairs know if you have any comment. > > We are looking for minute takers and jabber scribe. Please consider volunteering if you are planning to join the session. > > Presenters: please submit your slides as early as possible and no later than Sunday 26th of July EOD. > > Talk to you all soon! > Francesca > From nobody Tue Jul 21 15:47:57 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B9043A0528; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 15:47:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.898 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 TlcTHUcVk504; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 15:47:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mta5.iomartmail.com (mta5.iomartmail.com [62.128.193.155]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 754813A048D; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 15:47:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vs1.iomartmail.com (vs1.iomartmail.com [10.12.10.121]) by mta5.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 06LMlpA8001168; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 23:47:51 +0100 Received: from vs1.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0BAA2203D; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 23:47:51 +0100 (BST) Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (unknown [10.12.10.249]) by vs1.iomartmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9BE2F2203C; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 23:47:51 +0100 (BST) Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V (91-115-252-218.adsl.highway.telekom.at [91.115.252.218]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 06LMloR3009222 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 21 Jul 2020 23:47:51 +0100 Reply-To: From: "Adrian Farrel" To: Cc: Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 23:47:49 +0100 Organization: Old Dog Consulting Message-ID: <031601d65fb0$f6aa0a30$e3fe1e90$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Content-Language: en-gb Thread-Index: AdZfsML5HXSSC2DvRe2Ji8Sxb1JCNg== X-Originating-IP: 91.115.252.218 X-Thinkmail-Auth: adrian@olddog.co.uk X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-9.0.0.1623-8.2.0.1013-25556.003 X-TM-AS-Result: No--9.928-10.0-31-10 X-imss-scan-details: No--9.928-10.0-31-10 X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-9.0.0.1623-8.2.1013-25556.003 X-TMASE-Result: 10--9.928100-10.000000 X-TMASE-MatchedRID: BmVDvnCXigQOwAmmWH5kBLIGMNfiwa5NTJDl9FKHbrnQ8Q3V2m2BELY5 s2chkClpRk1orXRfQMXcDeX4EkgAibaFzPn1CONWaFAKyqG5M2LCTVwx00+msRLf1vz7ecPHpIs onG6IBJKMWQyaYgh6hInsqmcrOxvdqFQFIGuxZfGNvrcOCrb17ODTYjejIZTwn1Saw3edN5JM8T 8aenIqEFL3aZQAqY4XpaAmHwQ56bPf9L/jus+jIVC/pT10Wj6pj0jXY9STMgHhWjjGhpcHL6dn0 qqe99c5QOaAfcvrs36hd5adCGkZGtD6aWd1VmC4h4Ce12gzEFrOCMDR/Pa6IIDpStszePepX3Th noijm5jkXZxF9ayP1ZGTpe1iiCJqtD9qpBlNF8pTptoDfp6JrMRB0bsfrpPIx1FPlNAAmcBWQiK lSVXPTB9TOltsP4qZ1230pJhWjCIdfcr6/fqJOZ6oP1a0mRIj X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-12:0,22:0,33:0,34:0-0 Archived-At: Subject: [Gendispatch] Thoughts on draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 22:47:56 -0000 Hi, In this draft you have (section 3)... A WG that decides to create a design team to solve a problem has implicitely agreed to adopt the result. To not adopt the result is to say that the results of the WG mandated design team does not deserve first class agenda time. Such a design team would have been created, for instance, when a WG can not decide between two competing individual drafts and decides to merge them. s/implicitely/implicitly/ s/can not/cannot/ But I strongly disagree with this statement. I think that the DT is (very) often chartered to come up with a draft for the WG to consider adopting. If, however, as is somewhat common, the DT goes a little wild and produces a document that the DT likes but the WG finds unacceptable, then the document should not be adopted. While it is true that the WG can rewrite all of the document once adopted, it must be understood that there is a certain stickiness to fundamental ideas that are contained in adopted documents (the details may be changed, but the main thrust is much harder to change). I would go as far as to say that sometimes there is an expectation that the output of a DT will be presented to a WG as a done decision that the WG must accept because "the WG chartered the DT". But a DT is "just a group of people working together on a draft," and the fact that the WG chartered a DT merely means that the WG helped form the group of people. The sentence about the "first class agenda time" also seems wrong. Yes, the output of the DT deserves agenda time, but if the use of that time reveals that the result is not up to scratch, that is good use of time and the draft should not be adopted. Thanks, Adrian From nobody Tue Jul 21 16:43:20 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F1123A0822 for ; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 16:43:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 LLbi52_UQOxB for ; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 16:43:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.goatley.com (www.goatley.com [198.137.202.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 399FD3A081D for ; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 16:43:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from trixy.bergandi.net (cpe-76-93-158-174.san.res.rr.com [76.93.158.174]) by wwwlocal.goatley.com (PMDF V6.8 #2433) with ESMTP id <0QDU001L7F837Y@wwwlocal.goatley.com> for gendispatch@ietf.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 18:43:15 -0500 (CDT) Received: from Dans-MacBook-Pro.local ([69.12.173.8]) by trixy.bergandi.net (PMDF V6.7-x01 #2433) with ESMTPSA id <0QDU003IFF3LHN@trixy.bergandi.net> for gendispatch@ietf.org; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 16:40:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 69-12-173-8.static.dsltransport.net ([69.12.173.8] EXTERNAL) (EHLO Dans-MacBook-Pro.local) with TLS/SSL by trixy.bergandi.net ([10.0.42.18]) (PreciseMail V3.3); Tue, 21 Jul 2020 16:40:34 -0700 Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 16:43:13 -0700 From: Dan Harkins To: "gendispatch@ietf.org" Message-id: <6baa6f47-343f-5e5a-a980-421c32599675@lounge.org> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-language: en-US Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 X-PMAS-SPF: SPF check skipped for authenticated session (recv=trixy.bergandi.net, send-ip=69.12.173.8) X-PMAS-External-Auth: 69-12-173-8.static.dsltransport.net [69.12.173.8] (EHLO Dans-MacBook-Pro.local) X-PMAS-Software: PreciseMail V3.3 [200720] (trixy.bergandi.net) X-PMAS-Allowed: system rule (rule allow header:X-PMAS-External noexists) Archived-At: Subject: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-03 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 23:43:18 -0000   Hello,   This draft sees problems in language from an ethno-centric (namely, white, western-educated) perspective and assumes a uniform reaction to language it deems a problem. It creates language issues based on this perspective that are at best invented and at worst just wrong, although not all of the suggestions are bad. Merely discussing ones perspective on language would not be a problem but the authors are going to be imposing requirements on the RFC editor so it becomes everyone's issue. Therefore, I am compelled to object to this draft.   Let's start with "master-slave". The implication is that the "master-slave" construct is seeped in racism. In fact, the last millennia-plus of slavery, ending with the closing of the last of the slave markets of Europe in the early 20th century, was not oriented towards race at all. While there were black Africans being sold in Europe's slave markets most of those being bought and sold were white, mostly from eastern Europe and the Balkans. The characteristic that they had in common was religion-- they were Christians, but more importantly they were not Muslim. Indeed, the 21st century manifestation of state-sanctioned sale of human beings in the Islamic State Caliphate was not race-based either, the slaves were mostly from the indigenous Yazidi sect which are non-Muslim and their slavery was sanctioned by the Caliphate's religious leaders on religious grounds. [1]   While slaves in the Confederate States of America were almost entirely African (it was easier to identify an African who escaped bondage than it was an Irishman who escaped bondage), the slaveholders were not all white [2]. Also, the slaves bought in west Africa and transported across the Atlantic were not snatched by whites because they were black, they were snatched by other west African blacks and (Muslim) POC from the Sahel. People were enslaved not due to race but due to losing a war or, again, being a non-Muslim. And they were not enslaved by whites. [3]   The idea that master means white and slave means black is ahistorical and is an invention of the elite, western-educated white progressive and critical race theory. And it's an act of cultural supremacy to believe that view is universal. When everything is viewed through the prism of race it's not surprising that one sees race in everything.   The draft states that "master-slave" is "technically and historically inaccurate". It gives an example of DNS in which "the 'slave' is able to refuse zone transfers on the ground that it is malformed." How is that inaccurate? Could a real-life slave refuse a command on the grounds that the command given was gibberish or nonsensical? Of course! It defies common sense to think otherwise. There is nothing technically inaccurate with this example and no attempt at showing a historical inaccuracy is attempted by the draft. Indeed, history is quite different from the picture being painted by this draft.   The suggested alternatives for "master slave" do not convey the managerial oversight of the "master" and the worker role of the "slave" when used to describe technical phenomena. "Primary replica"? Replica of what? "Primary secondary"? What is this ordering? What does it describe? Nothing that's what! "Active standby"? But none of the components are standing by, they are just implementing different parts of the system differently. The fact that all of the suggested alternatives are inadequate and inappropriate belies a kind of technical ignorance that should disqualify one from imposing rules on terminology.   I find the inclusion of a single random comment as "an indicator of actual racism" to demonstrate the need for a "struggle against the racists among us" to be offensive. Calling this random person out as a racist in what is intended on being a permanent document is mean-spirited and unprofessional.   I note that Orwell's Politics and the English Language is referenced as a "fun read." Too bad the authors have completely missed the point. Their suggested replacement metaphors are about as stale and tired as the exaggerated ones Orwell lampoons. If one were to follow their guide the resulting RFC would full of "prose [which] consists less and less of words chosen for the sake of their meaning, and more and more of phrases tacked together like the sections of a prefabricated hen-house," as Orwell observes.   Indeed, the quote offered in section 3, "one goal of the application of rhetorical theory in the technical communication classroom is to assess the appropriateness of particular terms and to evaluate whether these terms will facilitate or hinder the readers' understanding of the technical material" could be used verbatim in an update of Orwell's article as one of his illustrations of "mental vices" that are manifest in modern writing! It is a prime example of what he describes as the "mixture of vagueness and sheer incompetence [that] is the most marked characteristic of modern English prose, and especially of any kind of political writing". That the authors of the draft don't see this speaks volumes.   The idea that elite white, northern Europeans are going to clean up gendered language for the rest of the world is also quite presumptive. This has been attempted before with "Latinx" which is supposed to be a gender-neutral term to refer to both Latinos and Latinas. This, though, is another "I'm here to save you", top down imposition of a solution to a non-problem that is seeing resistance from the targeted victim class:    "True, gender marking in language can affect thought. But that issue is largely     discussed among the intelligentsia. If you ask the proverbial person on the street,     you’ll find no gnawing concern about the bias encoded in gendered word endings....     To Latinos, Latinx may feel like an imposition by activists. It’s also too clever     by half for Romance-language speakers accustomed to gendered nouns." [4]   There were parts that made me question whether it's a parody or not. But when you get to section 4 you realize it cannot be a parody.   The idea that language can be offensive is mundane; that this is some new problem that needs solving though is new. Of course language can be offensive, that is the whole point of the free exchange of ideas. There is no right not to be offended nor should there be. With 7+ billion people on the planet it will always be trivial to find someone offended by something. This draft is full of offense. Which is fine. This critique will no doubt be offensive to some who read it. Isn't free speech grand? But when recommendations are being placed on the RFC editor to impose these sections of the prefabricated hen-house on the woeful draft writer is becomes something else. It goes beyond mere offense. It becomes action, action to force people to conform to a new orthodoxy. And that MUST NOT be tolerated in the IETF.   After all that negativity, I feel like I should suggest some edits to make this draft acceptable so let me try:   Start by removing all references to the racist affects of language-- [BrodieGravesGraves], [Burgest], [Eglash] and the rest. If the authors want to improve the quality of RFCs they should take a look at refreshing Orwell's tract. Make it for the IETF by suggesting ways for authors to improve their use of language by making it more descriptive, not by suggesting a set of metaphors that have been approved by the Ministry of Truth.   I would suggest adding a useful example of how a writer could progress from opaque metaphor to clear description by expanding on the idea behind the text in 3.2. Explain how if a writer used "eighty six" as a verb, as in "that packet gets eighty-sixed", it might be understood by a large plurality of readers but not by many who do not share the cultural heritage from which that metaphor arises. So the writer might resort to "blacklist" as an alternative. But that suffers from the same problem. That term arises out of a certain cultural heritage as well. Instead of criticizing the term on racial grounds note that it is imprecise and vague. There are plenty of people trying to implement an RFC that would have to spend time figuring out what it is the writer means, searching through the cultural baggage implied with the term. It's the kind of stale metaphor that Orwell was discussing. What is the technical matter that is being described? It's a list of criteria to use to deny access. It's a deny list. It's a list of reasons things are blocked from obtaining service. Its a block list. THOSE are descriptive terms. They do not assume any cultural baggage and they are not stale metaphors. That's what this draft should be doing. We don't need rules to police "racist" speech and we don't need speech codes and approved metaphors for RFCs. But we could all use some reminders of how to write better.   regards,   Dan. [1] Human Rights Watch, "Slavery: The ISIS Rules"     https://www.hrw.org/news/2015/09/05/slavery-isis-rules [2] Smithsonian Magazine, "How Native American Slaveholding Complicates the Trail of Tears" https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/how-native-american-slaveholders-complicate-trail-tears-narrative-180968339/ [3] New York Magazine, "The Last Slave" https://www.vulture.com/2018/04/zora-neale-hurston-barracoon-excerpt.html [4] The Atlantic, "Why Latinix Can't Catch On" https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/12/why-latinx-cant-catch-on/603943/ From nobody Tue Jul 21 18:51:45 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 933E53A082A; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 18:51:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 WxKp-ags2Plf; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 18:51:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pl1-x62b.google.com (mail-pl1-x62b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::62b]) (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 763DE3A0827; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 18:51:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x62b.google.com with SMTP id m16so191099pls.5; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 18:51:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=htQk6haEJdbDstnIG9azvqrxxNKnwZt0twUby2Hsa0o=; b=AMP/UzDJj0PA6/auoSE50qKM+3EN/eDv4SABzaM8q82oJ19MeSqCUKcQZREmpGWnHO jC8DPLMyDLxGr8Y/pQDQv4ANZu3Rm1p3dWZjpiqz/L9VkeR/jaSdEI3sWfXdTbc20l+W Su+YL+ECOAlo0+FZz+dK02ZeDj49Ol+5OQr3xp5cNW12Ybs5fRhAcc43qpNJ1bk3BLlL hk8pdVpAU2zZ+pLYPWeusF6baqKqBxGIQYYctqAhAzGGRQ5BTv9pQS5KOUwbtzR3BnHQ gF9qj38mGDqkLVnc6FXecIwhfrEvb2OTIO6HUh0/BdjtpuSngVgm1NIwAmHVhpnFKE7s hiog== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=htQk6haEJdbDstnIG9azvqrxxNKnwZt0twUby2Hsa0o=; b=RTzz1DDVKaFg0uO71o/pK1IPpIkzspe/oQDkSoL41rn7iLKlgKfthRFKf6HJ5nZDR3 iMV6fOCINit5dH8dOxsPy5xgYaXbg3HKVvHW/LTBqAxjDgtdUReNfiYmIiaI0RQRUReT Qgm384W/mBuT3TA/ob43lKJgYCimoKqBg2fIyWDjcXgGW7Ebt4kRXyyFac572rB4Ijli B35ACfJJF/ztp+rhyG5CTLJ2BwCifoJZMbLv9Mc7o9NPg7BG9Dc0FghXUgkF8Fx72LkE W4TEWrJfDhdMgVNEeMGtp+UfODeM4ELEtQUZFMSUg1iwZ2Et/ZwyQB0ZuzzyiVVsOxkY xSIQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530BjhiSO0rHB8SGLXsF7mjoMCvrszXB5le73qE2Lh7AWykNM8Dj sP8lk/4oKCSmlihAv7JA0wGgc1wu X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwVYjdgM0KDegCdrSl92ZRZ3xQkt14EASeEZaB4lQZzUNnDk3Neom8X3Qj8NyU7PFFUuBx0TA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:44c:: with SMTP id 70mr23458161ple.97.1595382700590; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 18:51:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([151.210.139.192]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d16sm21696175pfo.156.2020.07.21.18.51.38 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 21 Jul 2020 18:51:40 -0700 (PDT) To: adrian@olddog.co.uk, gendispatch@ietf.org Cc: draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption@ietf.org References: <031601d65fb0$f6aa0a30$e3fe1e90$@olddog.co.uk> From: Brian E Carpenter Message-ID: <2c566e75-901d-2289-9b20-21ada18eae30@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 13:51:37 +1200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <031601d65fb0$f6aa0a30$e3fe1e90$@olddog.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Thoughts on draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 01:51:43 -0000 fwiw, this co-author partly agrees with you. I think it's fair to say that a formally designated design team would be expected to produce a WG draft but I think the text you quote goes too far. Just to quote the relevant bit of RFC2418 (a.k.a. BCP25): "Design teams may range from an informal chat between people in a hallway to a formal set of expert volunteers that the WG chair or AD appoints to attack a controversial problem. The output of a design team is always subject to approval, rejection or modification by the WG as a whole." So we need to tune the text you quoted to be compatible with that. Regards Brian On 22-Jul-20 10:47, Adrian Farrel wrote: > Hi, > > In this draft you have (section 3)... > > A WG that decides to create a design team to solve a > problem has implicitely agreed to adopt the result. To not adopt the > result is to say that the results of the WG mandated design team does > not deserve first class agenda time. Such a design team would have > been created, for instance, when a WG can not decide between two > competing individual drafts and decides to merge them. > > s/implicitely/implicitly/ > s/can not/cannot/ > > But I strongly disagree with this statement. I think that the DT is (very) > often chartered to come up with a draft for the WG to consider adopting. If, > however, as is somewhat common, the DT goes a little wild and produces a > document that the DT likes but the WG finds unacceptable, then the document > should not be adopted. > > While it is true that the WG can rewrite all of the document once adopted, > it must be understood that there is a certain stickiness to fundamental > ideas that are contained in adopted documents (the details may be changed, > but the main thrust is much harder to change). > > I would go as far as to say that sometimes there is an expectation that the > output of a DT will be presented to a WG as a done decision that the WG must > accept because "the WG chartered the DT". But a DT is "just a group of > people working together on a draft," and the fact that the WG chartered a DT > merely means that the WG helped form the group of people. > > The sentence about the "first class agenda time" also seems wrong. Yes, the > output of the DT deserves agenda time, but if the use of that time reveals > that the result is not up to scratch, that is good use of time and the draft > should not be adopted. > > Thanks, > Adrian > > From nobody Tue Jul 21 18:58:26 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D32AD3A0842; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 18:58:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 ghTzC2ol0OqX; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 18:58:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D41B43A0839; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 18:58:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id B580B389E1; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 21:37:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id FBTRSrydziYf; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 21:37:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FCD5389DF; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 21:37:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id E733AEA; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 21:58:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Richardson To: adrian@olddog.co.uk, gendispatch@ietf.org, draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <031601d65fb0$f6aa0a30$e3fe1e90$@olddog.co.uk> References: <031601d65fb0$f6aa0a30$e3fe1e90$@olddog.co.uk> X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1 X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Thoughts on draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 01:58:24 -0000 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Adrian Farrel wrote: > In this draft you have (section 3)... > A WG that decides to create a design team to solve a > problem has implicitely agreed to adopt the result. To not adopt the > result is to say that the results of the WG mandated design team does > not deserve first class agenda time. Such a design team would have > been created, for instance, when a WG can not decide between two > competing individual drafts and decides to merge them. > s/implicitely/implicitly/ > s/can not/cannot/ (fixed in my copy) > But I strongly disagree with this statement. I think that the DT is (very) > often chartered to come up with a draft for the WG to consider adopting. If, > however, as is somewhat common, the DT goes a little wild and produces a > document that the DT likes but the WG finds unacceptable, then the document > should not be adopted. I guess I disagree about the mechanicals of the process. I really think that the DT should be charged with uploading it's work as draft-ietf-foobar-00.txt If the WG hates the result, then the DT can be fired and a new one created. Adoption is not endorsement. > I would go as far as to say that sometimes there is an expectation that the > output of a DT will be presented to a WG as a done decision that the WG must > accept because "the WG chartered the DT". But a DT is "just a group of > people working together on a draft," and the fact that the WG chartered a DT > merely means that the WG helped form the group of people. I agree totally, but the WG created the design team. If we do agenda time correctly, then the DT might get none. > The sentence about the "first class agenda time" also seems wrong. Yes, the > output of the DT deserves agenda time, but if the use of that time reveals > that the result is not up to scratch, that is good use of time and the draft > should not be adopted. If it deserved agenda time, then adopt it. -- ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | IoT architect [ ] mcr@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [ -- Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEbsyLEzg/qUTA43uogItw+93Q3WUFAl8XnToACgkQgItw+93Q 3WX6OwgAuujOLtHkrESlDV4DKn+LjWQDgb2VMuoXSpV6fGJppD1DwcBGeBGALWQO zs4f9OCb+36AtxlRT1N6e7/VSXXT9ZmZLpOPS48SIPxZ1XWbUoYheBcN/evBSs7H s/LNi5iSvo9AOh7O+JZM4uKbgfOsMXS6Ac9zsNji87gJSw8tv/CEda8vY52DndwH JNs412yYTtRVTrCmYl1ZpKIQCEDW2JezcpwujjDzJ9jQ08hXy72XNFqUT2/vblg7 TUGO9D2lGt8ZqhMidHZosnX8lMO9kiZiL9t9SBnhDMsXIyAA73lb4K1t4HQH1cuf /w4PWLGIFZSvWIkrgGP3X5hz3oxJiw== =9YGb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- From nobody Tue Jul 21 19:15:37 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CC573A0882; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 19:15:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.121 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.121 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.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 o81-R7j3-nQE; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 19:15:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailb2.tigertech.net (mailb2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.154]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A7FE83A087C; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 19:15:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BBJw52zBQz1p7Dj; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 19:15:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1595384133; bh=YcgMEYZT3/9DfXXM3L2Qn6sZqP1TKkgwRJhCVG2q1SU=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=dGtXUBQA73hqd9S74Obx9Ol01FPhLk98gk5xOS2PGWB9xxgj+9xNKU4VImzlNn59v UQNNPAevfYQgk37GgMsmUQfZjGIGagvQt6s2nTDzVfa1WELaggTQtDJmIVYrEyCv9i ypoWCo3C8IT7MK//MB2WEjwnTed8lVLBOJOnVI5c= X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at b2.tigertech.net Received: from [192.168.128.43] (209-255-163-147.ip.mcleodusa.net [209.255.163.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4BBJw44y7Wz1p78b; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 19:15:32 -0700 (PDT) To: Michael Richardson , gendispatch@ietf.org, draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption@ietf.org References: <031601d65fb0$f6aa0a30$e3fe1e90$@olddog.co.uk> <22930.1595383098@localhost> From: "Joel M. Halpern" Message-ID: Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2020 22:15:30 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <22930.1595383098@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Thoughts on draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 02:15:35 -0000 I strongly disagree with the text below about a WG automatically adopting a DT result. The DT is not the WG. It is not acceptable, in my view, for the DT product to be automatically adopted. In the two current cases I am involved with, it would be very bad, as it is clear that the purpose of the design team is to create a proposal which the WG can then review to see if it (the WG) agrees that it is a good starting point. (And yes, both DTs are chair-appointed DTs.) Yours, Joel On 7/21/2020 9:58 PM, Michael Richardson wrote: > > Adrian Farrel wrote: > > In this draft you have (section 3)... > > > A WG that decides to create a design team to solve a > > problem has implicitely agreed to adopt the result. To not adopt the > > result is to say that the results of the WG mandated design team does > > not deserve first class agenda time. Such a design team would have > > been created, for instance, when a WG can not decide between two > > competing individual drafts and decides to merge them. > > > s/implicitely/implicitly/ > > s/can not/cannot/ > > (fixed in my copy) > > > But I strongly disagree with this statement. I think that the DT is (very) > > often chartered to come up with a draft for the WG to consider adopting. If, > > however, as is somewhat common, the DT goes a little wild and produces a > > document that the DT likes but the WG finds unacceptable, then the document > > should not be adopted. > > I guess I disagree about the mechanicals of the process. > I really think that the DT should be charged with uploading it's work as draft-ietf-foobar-00.txt > If the WG hates the result, then the DT can be fired and a new one created. > > Adoption is not endorsement. > > > I would go as far as to say that sometimes there is an expectation that the > > output of a DT will be presented to a WG as a done decision that the WG must > > accept because "the WG chartered the DT". But a DT is "just a group of > > people working together on a draft," and the fact that the WG chartered a DT > > merely means that the WG helped form the group of people. > > I agree totally, but the WG created the design team. > If we do agenda time correctly, then the DT might get none. > > > The sentence about the "first class agenda time" also seems wrong. Yes, the > > output of the DT deserves agenda time, but if the use of that time reveals > > that the result is not up to scratch, that is good use of time and the draft > > should not be adopted. > > If it deserved agenda time, then adopt it. > > -- > ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ > ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | IoT architect [ > ] mcr@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [ > > > > > -- > Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works > -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- > > > > From nobody Tue Jul 21 20:35:28 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 074143A0A6E; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:35:26 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 qHtA6N6c82mj; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:35:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pj1-x102a.google.com (mail-pj1-x102a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102a]) (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 80F253A0A6D; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:35:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x102a.google.com with SMTP id k5so448765pjg.3; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:35:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=IaheZsNV1vclSRfsQBKcDdXcXgNL2dUCFGcJjrQp3YQ=; b=U3OUA+bNRk4ban8b58jJFPss4QM8B4NFQXrxppm+33Uf6TfKMwa+NEfW9w1aknUgfE CS9fxxZzMNsWTQrx5ozLFH679HeCD64cpKA6lutKg3vzdyBRC1P4mLJ7j+QbOlffTdKs yBK6VxlPS0g5vxMy/hCiQDrddrxcV7O0XU5xwQBkwibIsKpbnleOaamdvh6o4mobeGNM 3nmQ2x6q1OvgC68+7nFpvmJd/GanmFZ4HQfx+hrh8z0JWCVktSSI4OEUZovoEY9EJUBU nfQkD+BYJnfpFGcnay7BGsMeFyblch8JA10DUUDDMYZLKPlI1rv/ODoBUaEeEX+ptOQi ybyQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=IaheZsNV1vclSRfsQBKcDdXcXgNL2dUCFGcJjrQp3YQ=; b=m4deujCdiCxMboSa1brIXmRhQqGN1tf7j+hJCHpxnV/Ysx8WGHyJ0l6wzHkK3uqfjR 5XPw6LvoKCRiPYu7UsL6Ec2FS3cIqOec2UcYPIInFUoBw23ngtuVmMwi1+epkaTYnV3v HyVWpCIwyl+d+7WbkeI0btObgbOz1F4a8bNuaRrMarRrZD8m1qluQwI9P6wpeafHcT09 NgAprmS4aj1cHBYxTzd1mWaOAu0BpTfFEFfPz7YzHLpGJsCHTX4cDmfeE4G5bWUSBq2a 0TBBDd4Cusb9YrhKyBtrsbxH6nErvENlo3fGbJYyL1XTnGO1o9tmwzwzP9jnWBzB/90z ab3g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5324WH/qbGWUeXuXEyx/ha6/YR6aJQGHdHDGqt7p1b0/zxCnkZzL 4YbvPSwyoqkICPM+RnhP2njZEWnG X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzcX+mD77woTlSG6kIG416wvXDLZT4yiNuelvbm409t7vqwK9ix8nT1Gy+OHu2MvCBH+hIbiw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:c915:: with SMTP id v21mr7978631pjt.48.1595388923561; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:35:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([151.210.139.192]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n15sm4759059pjf.12.2020.07.21.20.35.21 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 21 Jul 2020 20:35:23 -0700 (PDT) To: "Joel M. Halpern" , Michael Richardson , gendispatch@ietf.org, draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption@ietf.org References: <031601d65fb0$f6aa0a30$e3fe1e90$@olddog.co.uk> <22930.1595383098@localhost> From: Brian E Carpenter Message-ID: <5bbe7766-bcec-dfb8-315c-441b23de93ac@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 15:35:20 +1200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Thoughts on draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 03:35:26 -0000 Let's stipulate that this paragraph of the draft needs to be rewritten. What does it need to say beyond what is said in RFC2418 (quoted in my previous message)? Regards Brian Carpenter On 22-Jul-20 14:15, Joel M. Halpern wrote: > I strongly disagree with the text below about a WG automatically > adopting a DT result. > The DT is not the WG. It is not acceptable, in my view, for the DT > product to be automatically adopted. In the two current cases I am > involved with, it would be very bad, as it is clear that the purpose of > the design team is to create a proposal which the WG can then review to > see if it (the WG) agrees that it is a good starting point. (And yes, > both DTs are chair-appointed DTs.) > > Yours, > Joel > > On 7/21/2020 9:58 PM, Michael Richardson wrote: >> >> Adrian Farrel wrote: >> > In this draft you have (section 3)... >> >> > A WG that decides to create a design team to solve a >> > problem has implicitely agreed to adopt the result. To not adopt the >> > result is to say that the results of the WG mandated design team does >> > not deserve first class agenda time. Such a design team would have >> > been created, for instance, when a WG can not decide between two >> > competing individual drafts and decides to merge them. >> >> > s/implicitely/implicitly/ >> > s/can not/cannot/ >> >> (fixed in my copy) >> >> > But I strongly disagree with this statement. I think that the DT is (very) >> > often chartered to come up with a draft for the WG to consider adopting. If, >> > however, as is somewhat common, the DT goes a little wild and produces a >> > document that the DT likes but the WG finds unacceptable, then the document >> > should not be adopted. >> >> I guess I disagree about the mechanicals of the process. >> I really think that the DT should be charged with uploading it's work as draft-ietf-foobar-00.txt >> If the WG hates the result, then the DT can be fired and a new one created. >> >> Adoption is not endorsement. >> >> > I would go as far as to say that sometimes there is an expectation that the >> > output of a DT will be presented to a WG as a done decision that the WG must >> > accept because "the WG chartered the DT". But a DT is "just a group of >> > people working together on a draft," and the fact that the WG chartered a DT >> > merely means that the WG helped form the group of people. >> >> I agree totally, but the WG created the design team. >> If we do agenda time correctly, then the DT might get none. >> >> > The sentence about the "first class agenda time" also seems wrong. Yes, the >> > output of the DT deserves agenda time, but if the use of that time reveals >> > that the result is not up to scratch, that is good use of time and the draft >> > should not be adopted. >> >> If it deserved agenda time, then adopt it. >> >> -- >> ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ >> ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | IoT architect [ >> ] mcr@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [ >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works >> -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- >> >> >> >> > From nobody Tue Jul 21 21:18:11 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E57EF3A0D66; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 21:18:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.121 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.121 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.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 2Ubz0LsOM_Ao; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 21:18:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailb2.tigertech.net (mailb2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.154]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C1493A0D68; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 21:18:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BBMdW16C0z1ny9B; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 21:18:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1595391487; bh=p89FTe70ncWpiEwc1PAl0j/JrQgYoHdGWbI9uj2YlKY=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=qP2ZqleBUtxUXgipvQoXn2+eWBMaGAjHKj6xntNoDIzrxVJeVVx1mfDaXh+xMmiw0 V4Ef7mEk88xI9fAIfTYPQywqR9C33Hi87878UQiiw/ZPMWFkLArYKobDTAmR68vyBo 5r9VqS+KauLiTBLsfY/bbv0PYN8Ipa1iE5QGDWEM= X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at b2.tigertech.net Received: from [192.168.128.43] (209-255-163-147.ip.mcleodusa.net [209.255.163.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4BBMdV17WDz1nsmk; Tue, 21 Jul 2020 21:18:06 -0700 (PDT) To: Brian E Carpenter , Michael Richardson , gendispatch@ietf.org, draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption@ietf.org References: <031601d65fb0$f6aa0a30$e3fe1e90$@olddog.co.uk> <22930.1595383098@localhost> <5bbe7766-bcec-dfb8-315c-441b23de93ac@gmail.com> From: "Joel M. Halpern" Message-ID: <0c9eb9ae-4dd5-7a81-f68a-f00c44fd52c2@joelhalpern.com> Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 00:18:04 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <5bbe7766-bcec-dfb8-315c-441b23de93ac@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Thoughts on draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 04:18:09 -0000 Personally, I like the text in 2418 about design teams. Yours, Joel On 7/21/2020 11:35 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > Let's stipulate that this paragraph of the draft needs to be rewritten. > What does it need to say beyond what is said in RFC2418 (quoted in > my previous message)? > > Regards > Brian Carpenter > > On 22-Jul-20 14:15, Joel M. Halpern wrote: >> I strongly disagree with the text below about a WG automatically >> adopting a DT result. >> The DT is not the WG. It is not acceptable, in my view, for the DT >> product to be automatically adopted. In the two current cases I am >> involved with, it would be very bad, as it is clear that the purpose of >> the design team is to create a proposal which the WG can then review to >> see if it (the WG) agrees that it is a good starting point. (And yes, >> both DTs are chair-appointed DTs.) >> >> Yours, >> Joel >> >> On 7/21/2020 9:58 PM, Michael Richardson wrote: >>> >>> Adrian Farrel wrote: >>> > In this draft you have (section 3)... >>> >>> > A WG that decides to create a design team to solve a >>> > problem has implicitely agreed to adopt the result. To not adopt the >>> > result is to say that the results of the WG mandated design team does >>> > not deserve first class agenda time. Such a design team would have >>> > been created, for instance, when a WG can not decide between two >>> > competing individual drafts and decides to merge them. >>> >>> > s/implicitely/implicitly/ >>> > s/can not/cannot/ >>> >>> (fixed in my copy) >>> >>> > But I strongly disagree with this statement. I think that the DT is (very) >>> > often chartered to come up with a draft for the WG to consider adopting. If, >>> > however, as is somewhat common, the DT goes a little wild and produces a >>> > document that the DT likes but the WG finds unacceptable, then the document >>> > should not be adopted. >>> >>> I guess I disagree about the mechanicals of the process. >>> I really think that the DT should be charged with uploading it's work as draft-ietf-foobar-00.txt >>> If the WG hates the result, then the DT can be fired and a new one created. >>> >>> Adoption is not endorsement. >>> >>> > I would go as far as to say that sometimes there is an expectation that the >>> > output of a DT will be presented to a WG as a done decision that the WG must >>> > accept because "the WG chartered the DT". But a DT is "just a group of >>> > people working together on a draft," and the fact that the WG chartered a DT >>> > merely means that the WG helped form the group of people. >>> >>> I agree totally, but the WG created the design team. >>> If we do agenda time correctly, then the DT might get none. >>> >>> > The sentence about the "first class agenda time" also seems wrong. Yes, the >>> > output of the DT deserves agenda time, but if the use of that time reveals >>> > that the result is not up to scratch, that is good use of time and the draft >>> > should not be adopted. >>> >>> If it deserved agenda time, then adopt it. >>> >>> -- >>> ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ >>> ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | IoT architect [ >>> ] mcr@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works >>> -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- >>> >>> >>> >>> >> From nobody Wed Jul 22 01:17:30 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BBDC3A0FC8; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 01:17:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 q9-LcQb7xdI2; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 01:17:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mta7.iomartmail.com (mta7.iomartmail.com [62.128.193.157]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 17BA63A0FC7; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 01:17:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vs1.iomartmail.com (vs1.iomartmail.com [10.12.10.121]) by mta7.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 06M8HNoH001998; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:17:23 +0100 Received: from vs1.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BF4E22042; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:17:23 +0100 (BST) Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (unknown [10.12.10.224]) by vs1.iomartmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 005DA2203D; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:17:22 +0100 (BST) Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V (62-46-76-49.adsl.highway.telekom.at [62.46.76.49]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 06M8HLAK020439 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:17:22 +0100 Reply-To: From: "Adrian Farrel" To: "'Joel M. Halpern'" , "'Brian E Carpenter'" , "'Michael Richardson'" , , References: <031601d65fb0$f6aa0a30$e3fe1e90$@olddog.co.uk> <22930.1595383098@localhost> <5bbe7766-bcec-dfb8-315c-441b23de93ac@gmail.com> <0c9eb9ae-4dd5-7a81-f68a-f00c44fd52c2@joelhalpern.com> In-Reply-To: <0c9eb9ae-4dd5-7a81-f68a-f00c44fd52c2@joelhalpern.com> Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:17:20 +0100 Organization: Old Dog Consulting Message-ID: <035201d66000$85fc9dc0$91f5d940$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Content-Language: en-gb Thread-Index: AQJejBCL84Lo1PMW+i0nUQAReuPaXwHR+wxfAlM15DwCGbJGRwHqUG7tp8GdELA= X-Originating-IP: 62.46.76.49 X-Thinkmail-Auth: adrian@olddog.co.uk X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-9.0.0.1623-8.2.0.1013-25556.005 X-TM-AS-Result: No--22.865-10.0-31-10 X-imss-scan-details: No--22.865-10.0-31-10 X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-9.0.0.1623-8.2.1013-25556.005 X-TMASE-Result: 10--22.864600-10.000000 X-TMASE-MatchedRID: I31hiQfYWUPxIbpQ8BhdbArgwFF/sjumVBDQSDMig9FUjspoiX02F9yw BfT2jSnr1mV6CKORBcwutduMdPdCI7T3le9lFBlPZdorcofH/GnjyVXs2X9Xy7V5fSMRD1zqsb5 SIL+JtI3AsERmpB/Gk5fucML7iAp6nU4Y8605Xzm628cXbnOhT+vWkvu/824/qr3CBdU3C2DCbx 8TWnQwXxN4AgRD01g9yJrTuhYLy9ZQ6n/rRNAUKvjQkA7rdCuFzVE3gQTykCrc9KE2iwgwHjPEa r+pBHW5VxVHMXvE0STbdST5vlhWadqWQ/alCw/ibMGKOuLn5FXe+NLQ743ftUYza41dGqxSzTfB L7TcF3jeZBKYIJuLznXkTD4yAjfTOB+vWshD0C/i2718A0M9uTuDayXS0LqBJrtlyrAXFvGNdGd bBgYTOoL1sCZFKUqibJMQUVpUSR4Wa6sqDbJYrU95wQijrwBLi/zKFHcBv/sZSz1vvG+0mu24eX CB+dgGd1ZZ2zhqo1Lt5Ueo9BXkL0fnZfcW4LfvlEsKAdKaJ41kAa0IkTbdiH5Isu006IGG9VlEu gQcmslgoLabqpGHzWGhQhLkYZ4S0cIvqMNuX/+HgJ7XaDMQWs4IwNH89roggOlK2zN496kUXwNS NzpaqtzIX+gJvVmDIEV00ZLOw+4LEx+quc3j90mu7SY1n1Mfa/fioJ9l4Hg8guXXRtiXILTX3sL JiXhWR1XS0Mm7UeRory5Ze4fh3U1+zyfzlN7y/sToY2qzpx5oFT3KzpHqE1NkM6vOVn5wdB0ntd 9Tzp6QZS2ujCtcuA== X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-12:0,22:0,33:0,34:0-0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Thoughts on draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:17:29 -0000 I agree with Joel. So we might jump two ways... 1. Simply remove the text about the DT (that is, the text I quoted) 2. Replace the quoted text with something like... A working group may set up a design team to solve a specific problem, and the design team may produce Internet-Drafts. The standing and operation of design teams is described in [RFC2418], and the drafts that they produce are candidates For adoption as working group drafts subject to the same Considerations as any other draft. Ciao, Adrian -----Original Message----- From: Gendispatch On Behalf Of Joel M. Halpern Sent: 22 July 2020 05:18 To: Brian E Carpenter ; Michael Richardson ; gendispatch@ietf.org; draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Thoughts on draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption Personally, I like the text in 2418 about design teams. Yours, Joel On 7/21/2020 11:35 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > Let's stipulate that this paragraph of the draft needs to be rewritten. > What does it need to say beyond what is said in RFC2418 (quoted in > my previous message)? > > Regards > Brian Carpenter > > On 22-Jul-20 14:15, Joel M. Halpern wrote: >> I strongly disagree with the text below about a WG automatically >> adopting a DT result. >> The DT is not the WG. It is not acceptable, in my view, for the DT >> product to be automatically adopted. In the two current cases I am >> involved with, it would be very bad, as it is clear that the purpose of >> the design team is to create a proposal which the WG can then review to >> see if it (the WG) agrees that it is a good starting point. (And yes, >> both DTs are chair-appointed DTs.) >> >> Yours, >> Joel >> >> On 7/21/2020 9:58 PM, Michael Richardson wrote: >>> >>> Adrian Farrel wrote: >>> > In this draft you have (section 3)... >>> >>> > A WG that decides to create a design team to solve a >>> > problem has implicitely agreed to adopt the result. To not adopt the >>> > result is to say that the results of the WG mandated design team does >>> > not deserve first class agenda time. Such a design team would have >>> > been created, for instance, when a WG can not decide between two >>> > competing individual drafts and decides to merge them. >>> >>> > s/implicitely/implicitly/ >>> > s/can not/cannot/ >>> >>> (fixed in my copy) >>> >>> > But I strongly disagree with this statement. I think that the DT is (very) >>> > often chartered to come up with a draft for the WG to consider adopting. If, >>> > however, as is somewhat common, the DT goes a little wild and produces a >>> > document that the DT likes but the WG finds unacceptable, then the document >>> > should not be adopted. >>> >>> I guess I disagree about the mechanicals of the process. >>> I really think that the DT should be charged with uploading it's work as draft-ietf-foobar-00.txt >>> If the WG hates the result, then the DT can be fired and a new one created. >>> >>> Adoption is not endorsement. >>> >>> > I would go as far as to say that sometimes there is an expectation that the >>> > output of a DT will be presented to a WG as a done decision that the WG must >>> > accept because "the WG chartered the DT". But a DT is "just a group of >>> > people working together on a draft," and the fact that the WG chartered a DT >>> > merely means that the WG helped form the group of people. >>> >>> I agree totally, but the WG created the design team. >>> If we do agenda time correctly, then the DT might get none. >>> >>> > The sentence about the "first class agenda time" also seems wrong. Yes, the >>> > output of the DT deserves agenda time, but if the use of that time reveals >>> > that the result is not up to scratch, that is good use of time and the draft >>> > should not be adopted. >>> >>> If it deserved agenda time, then adopt it. >>> >>> -- >>> ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ >>> ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | IoT architect [ >>> ] mcr@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works >>> -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- >>> >>> >>> >>> >> -- Gendispatch mailing list Gendispatch@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch From nobody Wed Jul 22 01:40:11 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 808A03A101B; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 01:40:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 RYYpnx9-bl9R; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 01:40:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mta7.iomartmail.com (mta7.iomartmail.com [62.128.193.157]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9C2D3A1018; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 01:40:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from vs3.iomartmail.com (vs3.iomartmail.com [10.12.10.124]) by mta7.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 06M8e6Kg021283; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:40:06 +0100 Received: from vs3.iomartmail.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99FEB22070; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:40:06 +0100 (BST) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (unknown [10.12.10.248]) by vs3.iomartmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83D852206F; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:40:06 +0100 (BST) Received: from LAPTOPK7AS653V (62-46-76-49.adsl.highway.telekom.at [62.46.76.49]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 06M8e5Kh030166 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:40:06 +0100 Reply-To: From: "Adrian Farrel" To: "'Michael Richardson'" , , References: <031601d65fb0$f6aa0a30$e3fe1e90$@olddog.co.uk> <22930.1595383098@localhost> In-Reply-To: <22930.1595383098@localhost> Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:40:04 +0100 Organization: Old Dog Consulting Message-ID: <036b01d66003$b2cc4c30$1864e490$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Content-Language: en-gb Thread-Index: AQJejBCL84Lo1PMW+i0nUQAReuPaXwHR+wxfp/RchhA= X-Originating-IP: 62.46.76.49 X-Thinkmail-Auth: adrian@olddog.co.uk X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSVA-9.0.0.1623-8.2.0.1013-25556.006 X-TM-AS-Result: No--9.714-10.0-31-10 X-imss-scan-details: No--9.714-10.0-31-10 X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-9.0.0.1623-8.2.1013-25556.006 X-TMASE-Result: 10--9.713600-10.000000 X-TMASE-MatchedRID: Kx0w2sAofbvxIbpQ8BhdbBlJRfzNw8afF9s8UTYYetW56EJXPeNCQzjw e7XJAYUPO8F0ltxQUINrW/tgjC4+AdQCbgEd9Z8QuVFL9NtjSQIcdpC+vdsCVriBTLMkgNsWmIK 1XpG1Ro2T/pRdnQNX8MIAG+vaLXmheIWtaoT+rz74s5FS/CUl2xmyTBaqiJvc9TNxI2yGRo+Arq oIZrVn11Hhx6CfuCzNwB7toSEnNVLTOx9rmzXuNSX+a5eEMES44OSJW6hGEzusxvTCCnhvxuMg5 MvjEdlKIiZlVHqSnxHRCiTlD5prigdmPGORdcWcYV18sEyS6Xz4uJ1REX4MHXm3tbX0ek5IvFOE dgEz5BO50LBiCs0Tt67MlPkyVwvmAXOSgg0dG3ecxB01DrjF91G3WAS/Tc13I0YrtQLsSUysgEG 7z3115mMMdIPf0hQZcYYcLWKnXoiDruDxPRuh6wrgwFF/sjumzgjA0fz2uiCA6UrbM3j3qRRfA1 I3Olqq3Mhf6Am9WYMgRXTRks7D7gsTH6q5zeP3Sa7tJjWfUx9r9+Kgn2XgeDpXzWpeWJSKo8WMk QWv6iV95l0nVeyiuD3qzHKAhsUYU6baA36eiazEQdG7H66TyKsQd9qPXhnJUd9ULqB2NCRAKctu UVNMstXjPNbtAqhtcA0sVeDOP6pbnUmI8MRuKVZca9RSYo/b X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-12:0,22:0,33:0,34:0-0 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Thoughts on draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:40:11 -0000 Michael, I think what you are saying (or what we should agree upon) is that different WGs run their work differently. It would be a shame, IMHO, to mandate the micromanagement of WGs to this level. IOW, sometimes the draft would get implicitly adopted, sometimes the chairs would adopted it by fiat, sometimes the WG would discuss it before adoption: leave it up to the chairs to decide how to run each situation with different DTs in different WGs. Making it clear to the chairs and participants what the options are is helpful to smooth and flexible operation - this is what we were trying to do with RFC 7221. Making tight micro-rules constrains "doing the right thing". Best, Adrian -----Original Message----- From: Michael Richardson Sent: 22 July 2020 02:58 To: adrian@olddog.co.uk; gendispatch@ietf.org; draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption@ietf.org Subject: Re: Thoughts on draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption Adrian Farrel wrote: > In this draft you have (section 3)... > A WG that decides to create a design team to solve a > problem has implicitely agreed to adopt the result. To not adopt the > result is to say that the results of the WG mandated design team does > not deserve first class agenda time. Such a design team would have > been created, for instance, when a WG can not decide between two > competing individual drafts and decides to merge them. > s/implicitely/implicitly/ > s/can not/cannot/ (fixed in my copy) > But I strongly disagree with this statement. I think that the DT is (very) > often chartered to come up with a draft for the WG to consider adopting. If, > however, as is somewhat common, the DT goes a little wild and produces a > document that the DT likes but the WG finds unacceptable, then the document > should not be adopted. I guess I disagree about the mechanicals of the process. I really think that the DT should be charged with uploading it's work as draft-ietf-foobar-00.txt If the WG hates the result, then the DT can be fired and a new one created. Adoption is not endorsement. > I would go as far as to say that sometimes there is an expectation that the > output of a DT will be presented to a WG as a done decision that the WG must > accept because "the WG chartered the DT". But a DT is "just a group of > people working together on a draft," and the fact that the WG chartered a DT > merely means that the WG helped form the group of people. I agree totally, but the WG created the design team. If we do agenda time correctly, then the DT might get none. > The sentence about the "first class agenda time" also seems wrong. Yes, the > output of the DT deserves agenda time, but if the use of that time reveals > that the result is not up to scratch, that is good use of time and the draft > should not be adopted. If it deserved agenda time, then adopt it. -- ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | IoT architect [ ] mcr@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [ -- Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- From nobody Wed Jul 22 06:09:50 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7A4E3A0971; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 06:09:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.121 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.121 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.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 HDFB96nc0vke; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 06:09:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailb2.tigertech.net (mailb2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.154]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 011BF3A07D4; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 06:09:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BBbQy5h4Sz1p7Gt; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 06:09:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1595423386; bh=fIgeVtuAyvbK9e4OR+wS9Cg3axdjRLmFZpwoFpnFvTo=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=WhAK7eAxJGCuAcNoBuxFmEYyYTYqkvJyVT5GdpIiyBesSboGt6Bg585XOZZxhU5gu MhOoe2f9Lw1N/vEe+EFCkYjHKYch9xoK123yN+teOx1sBwhGr3wPntQMxJD/7w0BmW tOaDw7uR6THpyh9Ik3B/bpyyEUWaTL1HLVWLANrU= X-Quarantine-ID: <43BtK1djJsbt> X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at b2.tigertech.net Received: from [192.168.128.43] (209-255-163-147.ip.mcleodusa.net [209.255.163.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4BBbQx4qw3z1p7Gm; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 06:09:45 -0700 (PDT) To: adrian@olddog.co.uk, 'Michael Richardson' , gendispatch@ietf.org, draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption@ietf.org References: <031601d65fb0$f6aa0a30$e3fe1e90$@olddog.co.uk> <22930.1595383098@localhost> <036b01d66003$b2cc4c30$1864e490$@olddog.co.uk> From: "Joel M. Halpern" Message-ID: <7008d9a0-a485-cf7d-8de7-cba5788539fe@joelhalpern.com> Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:09:43 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <036b01d66003$b2cc4c30$1864e490$@olddog.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Thoughts on draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 13:09:49 -0000 We may be disagreeing, as we did in an earlier email on a different thread, about the meaning of WG adoption. As I understand it, WG Adoption represents the WG agreeing that a given document is a good starting point for working on solving a specific problem that the WG wants to work on. The formation of a chair-appointed DT probably does represent some agreement that there is interest. It does nnot represent that the WG agrees that the DT output is a good starting point. It is indeed hoped that the result will be one the WG can adopt. But the DT does not get to assume WG agreement. It is based on the above meaning for adoption that I object to a process implication that a DT can force WG adoption of their result. Yours, Joel On 7/22/2020 4:40 AM, Adrian Farrel wrote: > Michael, > > I think what you are saying (or what we should agree upon) is that different > WGs run their work differently. It would be a shame, IMHO, to mandate the > micromanagement of WGs to this level. IOW, sometimes the draft would get > implicitly adopted, sometimes the chairs would adopted it by fiat, sometimes > the WG would discuss it before adoption: leave it up to the chairs to decide > how to run each situation with different DTs in different WGs. > > Making it clear to the chairs and participants what the options are is > helpful to smooth and flexible operation - this is what we were trying to do > with RFC 7221. Making tight micro-rules constrains "doing the right thing". > > Best, > Adrian > > -----Original Message----- > From: Michael Richardson > Sent: 22 July 2020 02:58 > To: adrian@olddog.co.uk; gendispatch@ietf.org; > draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption@ietf.org > Subject: Re: Thoughts on draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption > > > Adrian Farrel wrote: > > In this draft you have (section 3)... > > > A WG that decides to create a design team to solve a > > problem has implicitely agreed to adopt the result. To not adopt the > > result is to say that the results of the WG mandated design team does > > not deserve first class agenda time. Such a design team would have > > been created, for instance, when a WG can not decide between two > > competing individual drafts and decides to merge them. > > > s/implicitely/implicitly/ > > s/can not/cannot/ > > (fixed in my copy) > > > But I strongly disagree with this statement. I think that the DT is > (very) > > often chartered to come up with a draft for the WG to consider > adopting. If, > > however, as is somewhat common, the DT goes a little wild and produces > a > > document that the DT likes but the WG finds unacceptable, then the > document > > should not be adopted. > > I guess I disagree about the mechanicals of the process. > I really think that the DT should be charged with uploading it's work as > draft-ietf-foobar-00.txt > If the WG hates the result, then the DT can be fired and a new one created. > > Adoption is not endorsement. > > > I would go as far as to say that sometimes there is an expectation > that the > > output of a DT will be presented to a WG as a done decision that the > WG must > > accept because "the WG chartered the DT". But a DT is "just a group of > > people working together on a draft," and the fact that the WG > chartered a DT > > merely means that the WG helped form the group of people. > > I agree totally, but the WG created the design team. > If we do agenda time correctly, then the DT might get none. > > > The sentence about the "first class agenda time" also seems wrong. > Yes, the > > output of the DT deserves agenda time, but if the use of that time > reveals > > that the result is not up to scratch, that is good use of time and the > draft > > should not be adopted. > > If it deserved agenda time, then adopt it. > > -- > ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks > [ > ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | IoT architect > [ > ] mcr@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails > [ > > > > > -- > Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works > -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- > > > > From nobody Wed Jul 22 07:34:39 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 398B63A00D4; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 07:34:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 yC9qBJ9pEkfj; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 07:34:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 268A93A0039; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 07:34:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49AA838A23; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 10:14:05 -0400 (EDT) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id rFHkGaAv5zH3; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 10:14:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84D7538A21; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 10:14:04 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8A501CC; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 10:34:30 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Richardson To: adrian@olddog.co.uk, gendispatch@ietf.org, draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <036b01d66003$b2cc4c30$1864e490$@olddog.co.uk> References: <031601d65fb0$f6aa0a30$e3fe1e90$@olddog.co.uk> <22930.1595383098@localhost> <036b01d66003$b2cc4c30$1864e490$@olddog.co.uk> X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1 X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Thoughts on draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:34:38 -0000 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Adrian Farrel wrote: > I think what you are saying (or what we should agree upon) is that different > WGs run their work differently. It would be a shame, IMHO, to mandate the > micromanagement of WGs to this level. IOW, sometimes the draft would get > implicitly adopted, sometimes the chairs would adopted it by fiat, sometimes > the WG would discuss it before adoption: leave it up to the chairs to decide > how to run each situation with different DTs in different WGs. I agree with these goals. > Making it clear to the chairs and participants what the options are is > helpful to smooth and flexible operation - this is what we were trying to do > with RFC 7221. Making tight micro-rules constrains "doing the right thing". I would be satisfied if the result was that I could tell via symbol, set of colours, or reference to a subsection of a document, how a particular WG behaves. -- Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEbsyLEzg/qUTA43uogItw+93Q3WUFAl8YTnYACgkQgItw+93Q 3WUQHwf/UA5H62/khELWoyhyy4Xbnh5vzUNLC09LHs7DphjJxfKbLdA2RIeArUK8 dTmOHehV/9IagG9G3/8mMWy87wcmefq6lwwwIuFuquhJnCo0IPh2cKR8ysQxDNPX 18Qhiw3XJvIoP08KIfz/Y05H1pZpTgL/u7tv8vx030Jbvmvo2x00+akueFSFTxgz iECpMjbAMkhimoRn4Nqxiziuoc93+HTPsNr/TkDPZ7bGfRpNVaFeBhzM8EDB0YLJ wpRG3ucrQDK9AiY07+GITE17dRFAflf1q3bKq1M51/8FcJdUZFn2S1yLYgqL/zjn ok4Ovh/S9dhFoMNJSxDKZqc40fvb5g== =/NcY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=-- From nobody Wed Jul 22 07:35:19 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DAD083A0044 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 07:35:16 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.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 jjh4gghGd_Pk for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 07:35:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DCED3A0039 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 07:35:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0122332.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 06MESbR3030426 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 15:35:15 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : content-type : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=g4o4UQfmfzHjFAzfQpMyZ5daX4X9GVQ4xRVXqCRYODM=; b=IM2DCyqkbjiteyhhFbZXWeNSiW4jKlVCvFMhDSM/MUMLpAp8ynP1qE648X7H1FpCJnjq rBoDvKMLCr3bRn0hOBK+AMjhUgNIg0k4S9wtcxgufGWfPPRjHtt8g/rWXzqqUblfnvkM bocUqWUxtGCFh74tG0ZTUe/OxpZCIMQdIvrX8VW1Vu8b8vySEXVFPgxqAk30q45nf0PF pVPbQjCUmNj1zgB8CKoQACslEZozFxFlUEYVzy18Gs/+JiYXEYUsM6FlEUgH+HC//5Hq tjDfUZOo/svF+XxizvyQgThw7stU1D6QZb9oFYLxYJKF0ch/Q81ZMvgxarmfZXp+QczV 6g== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint1 (prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com [184.51.33.18] (may be forged)) by mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 32bs5uf9yh-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 15:35:15 +0100 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 06MEZ1Jv003685 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 10:35:13 -0400 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.53]) by prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com with ESMTP id 32dn7xm6x8-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 10:35:13 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 10:35:12 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 10:35:12 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: "gendispatch@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: draft-knodel-terminology-03 Thread-Index: AQHWYDVON5zEMrZ2JEWggR0nZkSYdw== Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:35:12 +0000 Message-ID: <918E1DAE-A409-40D0-A7FF-EFC5CFDA77C4@akamai.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.38.20061401 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.44.187] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_918E1DAEA40940D0A7FFEFC5CFDA77C4akamaicom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235, 18.0.687 definitions=2020-07-22_08:2020-07-22, 2020-07-22 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 mlxlogscore=773 bulkscore=0 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 adultscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2007220104 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235, 18.0.687 definitions=2020-07-22_08:2020-07-22, 2020-07-22 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 impostorscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 malwarescore=0 priorityscore=1501 lowpriorityscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 clxscore=1011 mlxlogscore=732 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2007220104 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-03 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:35:17 -0000 --_000_918E1DAEA40940D0A7FFEFC5CFDA77C4akamaicom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 SSBhbSByZXBseWluZyB0byBEYW7igJlzIG5vdGUsIGJ1dCB0aGUgZW1haWwgdGhyZWFkaW5nIGRv ZXMgbm90IHdvcmsgYmVjYXVzZSBJIGp1c3Qgam9pbmVkIHRoaXMgbGlzdC4NCg0KPiAgIFRoZSBp ZGVhIHRoYXQgZWxpdGUgd2hpdGUsIG5vcnRoZXJuIEV1cm9wZWFucyBhcmUgZ29pbmcgdG8gY2xl YW4gdXAgZ2VuZGVyZWQgbGFuZ3VhZ2UgZm9yIHRoZSByZXN0IG9mIHRoZSB3b3JsZCBpcyBhbHNv IHF1aXRlIHByZXN1bXB0aXZlLg0KDQpOby4gIFdlIGFyZSBjbGVhbmluZyB1cCB0aGUgbWVzcyB0 aGF0IHdlIGNyZWF0ZWQuDQo= --_000_918E1DAEA40940D0A7FFEFC5CFDA77C4akamaicom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <201DC200805D324F97833A01FA818578@akamai.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWwgeG1sbnM6bz0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZpY2U6b2ZmaWNlIiB4 bWxuczp3PSJ1cm46c2NoZW1hcy1taWNyb3NvZnQtY29tOm9mZmljZTp3b3JkIiB4bWxuczptPSJo dHRwOi8vc2NoZW1hcy5taWNyb3NvZnQuY29tL29mZmljZS8yMDA0LzEyL29tbWwiIHhtbG5zPSJo dHRwOi8vd3d3LnczLm9yZy9UUi9SRUMtaHRtbDQwIj4NCjxoZWFkPg0KPG1ldGEgaHR0cC1lcXVp dj0iQ29udGVudC1UeXBlIiBjb250ZW50PSJ0ZXh0L2h0bWw7IGNoYXJzZXQ9dXRmLTgiPg0KPG1l dGEgbmFtZT0iR2VuZXJhdG9yIiBjb250ZW50PSJNaWNyb3NvZnQgV29yZCAxNSAoZmlsdGVyZWQg bWVkaXVtKSI+DQo8c3R5bGU+PCEtLQ0KLyogRm9udCBEZWZpbml0aW9ucyAqLw0KQGZvbnQtZmFj ZQ0KCXtmb250LWZhbWlseTpXaW5nZGluZ3M7DQoJcGFub3NlLTE6NSAwIDAgMCAwIDAgMCAwIDAg MDt9DQpAZm9udC1mYWNlDQoJe2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYW1icmlhIE1hdGgiOw0KCXBhbm9zZS0x OjIgNCA1IDMgNSA0IDYgMyAyIDQ7fQ0KQGZvbnQtZmFjZQ0KCXtmb250LWZhbWlseTpDYWxpYnJp Ow0KCXBhbm9zZS0xOjIgMTUgNSAyIDIgMiA0IDMgMiA0O30NCi8qIFN0eWxlIERlZmluaXRpb25z ICovDQpwLk1zb05vcm1hbCwgbGkuTXNvTm9ybWFsLCBkaXYuTXNvTm9ybWFsDQoJe21hcmdpbjow aW47DQoJbWFyZ2luLWJvdHRvbTouMDAwMXB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMi4wcHQ7DQoJZm9udC1m YW1pbHk6IkNhbGlicmkiLHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7fQ0Kc3Bhbi5FbWFpbFN0eWxlMTcNCgl7bXNvLXN0 eWxlLXR5cGU6cGVyc29uYWwtY29tcG9zZTsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ2FsaWJyaSIsc2Fucy1z ZXJpZjsNCgljb2xvcjp3aW5kb3d0ZXh0O30NCi5Nc29DaHBEZWZhdWx0DQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS10 eXBlOmV4cG9ydC1vbmx5Ow0KCWZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMi4wcHQ7DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6IkNhbGli cmkiLHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7fQ0KQHBhZ2UgV29yZFNlY3Rpb24xDQoJe3NpemU6OC41aW4gMTEuMGlu Ow0KCW1hcmdpbjoxLjBpbiAxLjBpbiAxLjBpbiAxLjBpbjt9DQpkaXYuV29yZFNlY3Rpb24xDQoJ e3BhZ2U6V29yZFNlY3Rpb24xO30NCi8qIExpc3QgRGVmaW5pdGlvbnMgKi8NCkBsaXN0IGwwDQoJ e21zby1saXN0LWlkOjE3NzgwMTYxMTY7DQoJbXNvLWxpc3QtdHlwZTpoeWJyaWQ7DQoJbXNvLWxp c3QtdGVtcGxhdGUtaWRzOi05NzMxODk1NjIgLTExNjA5MDQ1MjggNjc2OTg2OTEgNjc2OTg2OTMg Njc2OTg2ODkgNjc2OTg2OTEgNjc2OTg2OTMgNjc2OTg2ODkgNjc2OTg2OTEgNjc2OTg2OTM7fQ0K QGxpc3QgbDA6bGV2ZWwxDQoJe21zby1sZXZlbC1zdGFydC1hdDo0Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1i ZXItZm9ybWF0OmJ1bGxldDsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGV4dDrvg5g7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRhYi1z dG9wOm5vbmU7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1wb3NpdGlvbjpsZWZ0Ow0KCXRleHQtaW5kZW50 Oi0uMjVpbjsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseTpXaW5nZGluZ3M7DQoJbXNvLWZhcmVhc3QtZm9udC1mYW1p bHk6IlRpbWVzIE5ldyBSb21hbiI7DQoJbXNvLWJpZGktZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q2FsaWJyaTt9DQpA bGlzdCBsMDpsZXZlbDINCgl7bXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1mb3JtYXQ6YnVsbGV0Ow0KCW1zby1s ZXZlbC10ZXh0Om87DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRhYi1zdG9wOm5vbmU7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJl ci1wb3NpdGlvbjpsZWZ0Ow0KCXRleHQtaW5kZW50Oi0uMjVpbjsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ291 cmllciBOZXciO30NCkBsaXN0IGwwOmxldmVsMw0KCXttc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLWZvcm1hdDpi dWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ674KnOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10YWItc3RvcDpub25lOw0K CW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246bGVmdDsNCgl0ZXh0LWluZGVudDotLjI1aW47DQoJ Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6V2luZ2RpbmdzO30NCkBsaXN0IGwwOmxldmVsNA0KCXttc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVt YmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ674K3Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10YWIt c3RvcDpub25lOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246bGVmdDsNCgl0ZXh0LWluZGVu dDotLjI1aW47DQoJZm9udC1mYW1pbHk6U3ltYm9sO30NCkBsaXN0IGwwOmxldmVsNQ0KCXttc28t bGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLWZvcm1hdDpidWxsZXQ7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRleHQ6bzsNCgltc28tbGV2 ZWwtdGFiLXN0b3A6bm9uZTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLXBvc2l0aW9uOmxlZnQ7DQoJdGV4 dC1pbmRlbnQ6LS4yNWluOw0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDb3VyaWVyIE5ldyI7fQ0KQGxpc3QgbDA6 bGV2ZWw2DQoJe21zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItZm9ybWF0OmJ1bGxldDsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGV4 dDrvgqc7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRhYi1zdG9wOm5vbmU7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLW51bWJlci1wb3Np dGlvbjpsZWZ0Ow0KCXRleHQtaW5kZW50Oi0uMjVpbjsNCglmb250LWZhbWlseTpXaW5nZGluZ3M7 fQ0KQGxpc3QgbDA6bGV2ZWw3DQoJe21zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItZm9ybWF0OmJ1bGxldDsNCglt c28tbGV2ZWwtdGV4dDrvgrc7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVsLXRhYi1zdG9wOm5vbmU7DQoJbXNvLWxldmVs LW51bWJlci1wb3NpdGlvbjpsZWZ0Ow0KCXRleHQtaW5kZW50Oi0uMjVpbjsNCglmb250LWZhbWls eTpTeW1ib2w7fQ0KQGxpc3QgbDA6bGV2ZWw4DQoJe21zby1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItZm9ybWF0OmJ1 bGxldDsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGV4dDpvOw0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10YWItc3RvcDpub25lOw0KCW1z by1sZXZlbC1udW1iZXItcG9zaXRpb246bGVmdDsNCgl0ZXh0LWluZGVudDotLjI1aW47DQoJZm9u dC1mYW1pbHk6IkNvdXJpZXIgTmV3Ijt9DQpAbGlzdCBsMDpsZXZlbDkNCgl7bXNvLWxldmVsLW51 bWJlci1mb3JtYXQ6YnVsbGV0Ow0KCW1zby1sZXZlbC10ZXh0Ou+CpzsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtdGFi LXN0b3A6bm9uZTsNCgltc28tbGV2ZWwtbnVtYmVyLXBvc2l0aW9uOmxlZnQ7DQoJdGV4dC1pbmRl bnQ6LS4yNWluOw0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OldpbmdkaW5nczt9DQpvbA0KCXttYXJnaW4tYm90dG9t OjBpbjt9DQp1bA0KCXttYXJnaW4tYm90dG9tOjBpbjt9DQotLT48L3N0eWxlPg0KPC9oZWFkPg0K PGJvZHkgbGFuZz0iRU4tVVMiIGxpbms9IiMwNTYzQzEiIHZsaW5rPSIjOTU0RjcyIj4NCjxkaXYg Y2xhc3M9IldvcmRTZWN0aW9uMSI+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0i Zm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdCI+SSBhbSByZXBseWluZyB0byBEYW7igJlzIG5vdGUsIGJ1dCB0aGUg ZW1haWwgdGhyZWFkaW5nIGRvZXMgbm90IHdvcmsgYmVjYXVzZSBJIGp1c3Qgam9pbmVkIHRoaXMg bGlzdC48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBz dHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdCI+PG86cD4mbmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAg Y2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQiPiZndDsmbmJz cDsmbmJzcDsgVGhlIGlkZWEgdGhhdCBlbGl0ZSB3aGl0ZSwgbm9ydGhlcm4gRXVyb3BlYW5zIGFy ZSBnb2luZyB0byBjbGVhbiB1cCBnZW5kZXJlZCBsYW5ndWFnZSBmb3IgdGhlIHJlc3Qgb2YgdGhl IHdvcmxkIGlzIGFsc28gcXVpdGUgcHJlc3VtcHRpdmUuPG86cD48L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0K PHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQiPjxvOnA+ Jm5ic3A7PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxl PSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0Ij5Oby4mbmJzcDsgV2UgYXJlIGNsZWFuaW5nIHVwIHRoZSBtZXNz IHRoYXQgd2UgY3JlYXRlZC48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvYm9keT4N CjwvaHRtbD4NCg== --_000_918E1DAEA40940D0A7FFEFC5CFDA77C4akamaicom_-- From nobody Wed Jul 22 08:41:28 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A54C3A0925 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:41:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 VvivdRmRSrHc for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:41:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.goatley.com (www.goatley.com [198.137.202.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40E263A093D for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:41:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from trixy.bergandi.net (cpe-76-93-158-174.san.res.rr.com [76.93.158.174]) by wwwlocal.goatley.com (PMDF V6.8 #2433) with ESMTP id <0QDV044DXNKXLD@wwwlocal.goatley.com> for gendispatch@ietf.org; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 10:41:21 -0500 (CDT) Received: from Dans-MacBook-Pro.local ([69.12.173.8]) by trixy.bergandi.net (PMDF V6.7-x01 #2433) with ESMTPSA id <0QDV002K5NGCTJ@trixy.bergandi.net> for gendispatch@ietf.org; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:38:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 69-12-173-8.static.dsltransport.net ([69.12.173.8] EXTERNAL) (EHLO Dans-MacBook-Pro.local) with TLS/SSL by trixy.bergandi.net ([10.0.42.18]) (PreciseMail V3.3); Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:38:36 -0700 Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:41:20 -0700 From: Dan Harkins In-reply-to: <918E1DAE-A409-40D0-A7FF-EFC5CFDA77C4@akamai.com> To: gendispatch@ietf.org Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_K981xN6zI4R3wHgVQ+jw9A)" Content-language: en-US User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 X-PMAS-SPF: SPF check skipped for authenticated session (recv=trixy.bergandi.net, send-ip=69.12.173.8) X-PMAS-External-Auth: 69-12-173-8.static.dsltransport.net [69.12.173.8] (EHLO Dans-MacBook-Pro.local) References: <918E1DAE-A409-40D0-A7FF-EFC5CFDA77C4@akamai.com> X-PMAS-Software: PreciseMail V3.3 [200720] (trixy.bergandi.net) X-PMAS-Allowed: system rule (rule allow header:X-PMAS-External noexists) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-03 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 15:41:24 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --Boundary_(ID_K981xN6zI4R3wHgVQ+jw9A) Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT   Hi Rich, On 7/22/20 7:35 AM, Salz, Rich wrote: > > I am replying to Dan’s note, but the email threading does not work > because I just joined this list. > > >   The idea that elite white, northern Europeans are going to clean up > gendered language for the rest of the world is also quite presumptive. > > No.  We are cleaning up the mess that we created. >   That reminds me of that classic retort from Tonto, "what do you mean 'we' white man?" :-)   Look around, the woke brigades who view language as violence or who think metaphors prevent blacks from joining STEM fields are made up almost exclusively of well-off ("elite" is a bad word, I should not have used that) white people. The kind of people who can have what are euphemistically called "First World Problems." I don't think the rest of the world sees the mess that you do. The example I gave right after the quote you include above (regarding opposition to the word "Latinx" by the people it's supposed to "help") illustrates that fact quite nicely.   Dan. --Boundary_(ID_K981xN6zI4R3wHgVQ+jw9A) Content-type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT  
  Hi Rich,

On 7/22/20 7:35 AM, Salz, Rich wrote:

I am replying to Dan’s note, but the email threading does not work because I just joined this list.

 

>   The idea that elite white, northern Europeans are going to clean up gendered language for the rest of the world is also quite presumptive.

 

No.  We are cleaning up the mess that we created.

 
  That reminds me of that classic retort from Tonto, "what do you mean 'we'
white man?" :-)

  Look around, the woke brigades who view language as violence or who think
metaphors prevent blacks from joining STEM fields are made up almost exclusively
of well-off ("elite" is a bad word, I should not have used that) white people.
The kind of people who can have what are euphemistically called "First World
Problems." I don't think the rest of the world sees the mess that you do. The
example I gave right after the quote you include above (regarding opposition
to the word "Latinx" by the people it's supposed to "help") illustrates that
fact quite nicely.

  Dan.



 --Boundary_(ID_K981xN6zI4R3wHgVQ+jw9A)-- From nobody Wed Jul 22 08:51:27 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79ADE3A0920 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:51:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.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 NMOSMAv6NACg for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:51:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA1053A091F for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:51:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0050095.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050095.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 06MFh8d9030173; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 16:51:23 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=mtXw2z3ALudlzZGFEQGGxwBgelot3vfMXHm1m41/HkI=; b=l5zw5Zzn8/L+9Xq4+983a5z39xtmjzCpGffwHZFSSuXgG4eAuvLJGPZi/kDxEayX7W9w G3okXiHIbbmj1LfCw0paJx1GJwphe5AR0v4FbR0EPrfcHqVjtBxWSvzwuYW3Fb+9c8N+ ecJyPPhKfwQ1UnTAT7l6XyqgCfAr+ZKIks7Q4ZEVWE7raHyKQHF2NqPDTtSQQeuOWs65 2JV4LsHVzQMIiuWImua8gsM9FnKF3L42ctMClDklf0f1Xc4rzi8kkjv0vN9p4XNUjT+M j9BVPX3mZuHDSAfJ3wKCnXU/P4BEr+pYGQM75/ppSFBZHaNcLAxqOBnwso2nVCdv09nC tQ== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint5 (prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com [184.51.33.60] (may be forged)) by m0050095.ppops.net-00190b01. with ESMTP id 32bs4qvdu4-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 22 Jul 2020 16:51:23 +0100 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 06MFjdpn001401; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:51:22 -0700 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.33]) by prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com with ESMTP id 32dmp9mjhe-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 22 Jul 2020 08:51:21 -0700 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb3.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.103) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 11:51:21 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 11:51:21 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Dan Harkins , "gendispatch@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-03 Thread-Index: AQHWYDVON5zEMrZ2JEWggR0nZkSYd6kT/7oA//+/voA= Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 15:51:21 +0000 Message-ID: References: <918E1DAE-A409-40D0-A7FF-EFC5CFDA77C4@akamai.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.38.20061401 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.44.187] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_D0A4B7EEE79947A39A8D115BA744F8E5akamaicom_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235, 18.0.687 definitions=2020-07-22_09:2020-07-22, 2020-07-22 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxscore=0 bulkscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=958 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2007220107 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235, 18.0.687 definitions=2020-07-22_09:2020-07-22, 2020-07-22 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=916 priorityscore=1501 clxscore=1011 mlxscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 impostorscore=0 spamscore=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2007220107 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-03 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 15:51:25 -0000 --_000_D0A4B7EEE79947A39A8D115BA744F8E5akamaicom_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 DQo+ICBMb29rIGFyb3VuZCwgdGhlIHdva2UgYnJpZ2FkZXMgd2hvIHZpZXcgbGFuZ3VhZ2UgYXMg dmlvbGVuY2Ugb3Igd2hvIHRoaW5rDQptZXRhcGhvcnMgcHJldmVudCBibGFja3MgZnJvbSBqb2lu aW5nIFNURU0gZmllbGRzIGFyZSBtYWRlIHVwIGFsbW9zdCBleGNsdXNpdmVseQ0Kb2Ygd2VsbC1v ZmYgKCJlbGl0ZSIgaXMgYSBiYWQgd29yZCwgSSBzaG91bGQgbm90IGhhdmUgdXNlZCB0aGF0KSB3 aGl0ZSBwZW9wbGUuDQoNCkFyZ3VhYmx5LCB0aGlzIGlzIGJlY2F1c2Ugb3RoZXJzIGFyZW7igJl0 IGluIHRoZSBjb21tdW5pdHkuIE9yIGl04oCZcyBhIGh5cG90aGVzaXMsIGFuZCBvbmUgd2F5IHRv IHRlc3QgaXQgaXMgdG8gY2hhbmdlIHRoZSB3b3JkcyBhbmQgc2VlIGlmIGl0IGhlbHBzLiBPciBz b21lIG9mIHRob3NlIHByb3Bvc2luZyB0aGUgY2hhbmdlIGhhdmUgcHJpdmF0ZSBrbm93bGVkZ2Uu DQoNClVzaW5nIHBocmFzZXMgbGlrZSDigJx0aGUgd29rZSBicmlnYWRl4oCdIGRvZXNu4oCZdCBo ZWxwIHRoZSBkaXNjdXNzaW9uLg0KDQo= --_000_D0A4B7EEE79947A39A8D115BA744F8E5akamaicom_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <64846E25C09A88478100793DE8E81C69@akamai.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 PGh0bWwgeG1sbnM6bz0idXJuOnNjaGVtYXMtbWljcm9zb2Z0LWNvbTpvZmZpY2U6b2ZmaWNlIiB4 bWxuczp3PSJ1cm46c2NoZW1hcy1taWNyb3NvZnQtY29tOm9mZmljZTp3b3JkIiB4bWxuczptPSJo dHRwOi8vc2NoZW1hcy5taWNyb3NvZnQuY29tL29mZmljZS8yMDA0LzEyL29tbWwiIHhtbG5zPSJo dHRwOi8vd3d3LnczLm9yZy9UUi9SRUMtaHRtbDQwIj4NCjxoZWFkPg0KPG1ldGEgaHR0cC1lcXVp dj0iQ29udGVudC1UeXBlIiBjb250ZW50PSJ0ZXh0L2h0bWw7IGNoYXJzZXQ9dXRmLTgiPg0KPG1l dGEgbmFtZT0iR2VuZXJhdG9yIiBjb250ZW50PSJNaWNyb3NvZnQgV29yZCAxNSAoZmlsdGVyZWQg bWVkaXVtKSI+DQo8c3R5bGU+PCEtLQ0KLyogRm9udCBEZWZpbml0aW9ucyAqLw0KQGZvbnQtZmFj ZQ0KCXtmb250LWZhbWlseToiQ2FtYnJpYSBNYXRoIjsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToyIDQgNSAzIDUgNCA2 IDMgMiA0O30NCkBmb250LWZhY2UNCgl7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6Q2FsaWJyaTsNCglwYW5vc2UtMToy IDE1IDUgMiAyIDIgNCAzIDIgNDt9DQovKiBTdHlsZSBEZWZpbml0aW9ucyAqLw0KcC5Nc29Ob3Jt YWwsIGxpLk1zb05vcm1hbCwgZGl2Lk1zb05vcm1hbA0KCXttYXJnaW46MGluOw0KCW1hcmdpbi1i b3R0b206LjAwMDFwdDsNCglmb250LXNpemU6MTIuMHB0Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYWxpYnJp IixzYW5zLXNlcmlmO30NCnR0DQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS1wcmlvcml0eTo5OTsNCglmb250LWZhbWls eToiQ291cmllciBOZXciO30NCnNwYW4uRW1haWxTdHlsZTIwDQoJe21zby1zdHlsZS10eXBlOnBl cnNvbmFsLXJlcGx5Ow0KCWZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OiJDYWxpYnJpIixzYW5zLXNlcmlmOw0KCWNvbG9y OndpbmRvd3RleHQ7fQ0KLk1zb0NocERlZmF1bHQNCgl7bXNvLXN0eWxlLXR5cGU6ZXhwb3J0LW9u bHk7DQoJZm9udC1zaXplOjEwLjBwdDt9DQpAcGFnZSBXb3JkU2VjdGlvbjENCgl7c2l6ZTo4LjVp biAxMS4waW47DQoJbWFyZ2luOjEuMGluIDEuMGluIDEuMGluIDEuMGluO30NCmRpdi5Xb3JkU2Vj dGlvbjENCgl7cGFnZTpXb3JkU2VjdGlvbjE7fQ0KLS0+PC9zdHlsZT4NCjwvaGVhZD4NCjxib2R5 IGxhbmc9IkVOLVVTIiBsaW5rPSIjMDU2M0MxIiB2bGluaz0iIzk1NEY3MiI+DQo8ZGl2IGNsYXNz PSJXb3JkU2VjdGlvbjEiPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImZvbnQt c2l6ZToxMC4wcHQ7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6JnF1b3Q7Q291cmllciBOZXcmcXVvdDsiPjxicj4NCjx0 dD4mZ3Q7Jm5ic3A7IExvb2sgYXJvdW5kLCB0aGUgd29rZSBicmlnYWRlcyB3aG8gdmlldyBsYW5n dWFnZSBhcyB2aW9sZW5jZSBvciB3aG8gdGhpbms8L3R0Pjxicj4NCjx0dD5tZXRhcGhvcnMgcHJl dmVudCBibGFja3MgZnJvbSBqb2luaW5nIFNURU0gZmllbGRzIGFyZSBtYWRlIHVwIGFsbW9zdCBl eGNsdXNpdmVseTwvdHQ+PGJyPg0KPHR0Pm9mIHdlbGwtb2ZmICgmcXVvdDtlbGl0ZSZxdW90OyBp cyBhIGJhZCB3b3JkLCBJIHNob3VsZCBub3QgaGF2ZSB1c2VkIHRoYXQpIHdoaXRlIHBlb3BsZS48 bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvdHQ+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4NCjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0 eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0Ij48bzpwPiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8cCBj bGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdCI+QXJndWFibHks IHRoaXMgaXMgYmVjYXVzZSBvdGhlcnMgYXJlbuKAmXQgaW4gdGhlIGNvbW11bml0eS4gT3IgaXTi gJlzIGEgaHlwb3RoZXNpcywgYW5kIG9uZSB3YXkgdG8gdGVzdCBpdCBpcyB0byBjaGFuZ2UgdGhl IHdvcmRzIGFuZCBzZWUgaWYgaXQgaGVscHMuIE9yIHNvbWUgb2YgdGhvc2UgcHJvcG9zaW5nIHRo ZSBjaGFuZ2UgaGF2ZSBwcml2YXRlIGtub3dsZWRnZS48bzpwPjwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8 cCBjbGFzcz0iTXNvTm9ybWFsIj48c3BhbiBzdHlsZT0iZm9udC1zaXplOjExLjBwdCI+PG86cD4m bmJzcDs8L286cD48L3NwYW4+PC9wPg0KPHAgY2xhc3M9Ik1zb05vcm1hbCI+PHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9 ImZvbnQtc2l6ZToxMS4wcHQiPlVzaW5nIHBocmFzZXMgbGlrZSDigJx0aGUgd29rZSBicmlnYWRl 4oCdIGRvZXNu4oCZdCBoZWxwIHRoZSBkaXNjdXNzaW9uLjxvOnA+PC9vOnA+PC9zcGFuPjwvcD4N CjxwIGNsYXNzPSJNc29Ob3JtYWwiPjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJmb250LXNpemU6MTEuMHB0Ij48bzpw PiZuYnNwOzwvbzpwPjwvc3Bhbj48L3A+DQo8L2Rpdj4NCjwvYm9keT4NCjwvaHRtbD4NCg== --_000_D0A4B7EEE79947A39A8D115BA744F8E5akamaicom_-- From nobody Wed Jul 22 09:37:11 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77A863A0B3D for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:37:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=AwaH6UEW; dkim=pass (1536-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=Mly/3UyJ 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 NMpEUMLbWCyN for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:37:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE48D3A0B36 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:37:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 9178 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2020 16:37:05 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=23d4.5f186b31.k2007; bh=8Xq1knfYBeUjUVXtbW7BFCblDXU5DEbvxdI4fqWMlgQ=; b=AwaH6UEWasG4goU0XvCGmpySpE4EvC8gMS+pNKHnsDEtrmXeE+Fd8IAAIK+ikf0IT/Ez9gBXFPSsQgEI4PjVPRc8C9T6+LQnhH0w0rXjUfexxWdcxVtsij4LTqYVqdauJoYtui6DjF1Z0PJ9Tm5iyADis5W6RpN4wLrM0ySGMT2+HE9t0daxuQ1BfDW7FoEF+VGa1OavHcBWkZrS8joK+3B0Do+9tqgALNR11Ux2Zms5qPQi+doKq6mVQu3Zx20n DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=23d4.5f186b31.k2007; bh=8Xq1knfYBeUjUVXtbW7BFCblDXU5DEbvxdI4fqWMlgQ=; b=Mly/3UyJJ6cbr6U1yK0JflQTvVWkRNlWQAB06mSLArj0ug65NciwQi8AGGSAFQSrmFv6XD21N1iotH9FJrjHhKL397LCchTgHdDTJZvmfVw88q3l9+5Gu7ZzU+X341kI7o9+PqVOtjgSYAWVTyY2qhs4veQ32kWe76DkeI3l1fPxwYcz0McTpcNiaPBEHcXbeyrDJ17twD5bQqHMyO6DpfxYCckYyJR8zT7B6B5TjGiiml0GK4SqZS5I7aXfLa2w Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 22 Jul 2020 16:37:04 -0000 Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id 8ADB21D61A46; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 12:37:04 -0400 (EDT) Date: 22 Jul 2020 12:37:04 -0400 Message-Id: <20200722163704.8ADB21D61A46@ary.qy> From: "John Levine" To: gendispatch@ietf.org Cc: adrian@olddog.co.uk In-Reply-To: <048201d65124$fe4cd910$fae68b30$@olddog.co.uk> Organization: Taughannock Networks X-Headerized: yes Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-02 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 16:37:09 -0000 In article <048201d65124$fe4cd910$fae68b30$@olddog.co.uk> you write: >Thanks, Niels and Mallory, for having the strength to persevere with this important topic. I would >like to see the IETF reach some fairly rapid resolution on the thrust of your work so that we can >advise authors and the RPC on the way we want to use language. Having finally gotten around to reading this draft, i think there is some good advice combined with unhelpful and sometimes ahistoric purported motivations. We can stop referring to things as master and slave because we think slavery is bad. As others have noted, western hemisphere race-based slavery is only one variety, and vast numbers of people all over the world became enslaved because they were the wrong religion, the wrong side at the end of a battle, the wrong sex, or just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Similarly, blacklist is a term that goes back to the 1500s and has been used to sanction people for activities such as union organizing or, in the mid-20th century US, accusations of political affiliation. We can agree that blacklisting people is bad without making false connections to race. The gratuitous racial references have two other unfortunate effects: one is to give an implicit free pass to people from other cultural backgrounds, and they ignore terms that really are about race such as the verbs "grandfather" and "redline". Finally, the proposed list of substitutes isn't very good. Rather than try and come up with others at this point, I would suggest people think about what the thing they're describing is actually doing, and the implications of the metaphors they use. Master/slave implies that the slave has to do what the master says, which is usually what's intended, but also that the master can sell the slave, which is not. Look for something where the metaphor actually matches what it's describing. R's, John PS: English has a perfectly good non-gendered singular pronoun but I've given up reminding people about it. From nobody Wed Jul 22 09:43:39 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 724443A0B43 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:43:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.896 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 VV5b5f-_XvyW for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:43:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from episteme.net (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2EC5D3A0B41 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 09:43:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC468B58C0EB for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 11:43:34 -0500 (CDT) Received: from episteme.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (episteme.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id i2X81OeRRgk6 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 11:43:33 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [172.16.1.9] (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4A31EB58C0DF for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 11:43:33 -0500 (CDT) From: "Pete Resnick" To: gendispatch@ietf.org Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 11:43:32 -0500 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5699) Message-ID: <2EA7CD9C-F280-4D10-9AC0-5A6A880BF0EB@episteme.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; markup=markdown Archived-At: Subject: [Gendispatch] Reminder of charter / discussion limits X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 16:43:37 -0000 Folks, I just wanted to send a short reminder of our charter and what it means for discussions on this list. Some discussion of the contents of documents on our agenda is certainly necessary to figure out how to dispatch them, and documents without homes means we end up having a bit of content discussion because there is no other place to do so yet. That said, unlike other dispatch-style WGs, we are specifically not chartered to actually work on documents in this WG; we're only meant to figure out where to send them. Please try to contain your enthusiasm about the contents of documents until after we get them dispatched. As I said above, a bit of content discussion is not the end of the world, but when we see 20-odd messages on the draft-adoption draft, 9 on eligibility-expand, and 8 on terminology, I start to worry about the rabbit hole some of us might be jumping down. One of your dutiful chairs, pr -- Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ All connections to the world are tenuous at best From nobody Wed Jul 22 13:44:20 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2D2C3A096E for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 13:44:18 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.08 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.08 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=nostrum.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 TU50-IrbCCXS for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 13:44:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (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 69EA13A096C for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 13:44:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unescapeable.local ([47.186.30.41]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id 06MKiFr8083548 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 15:44:16 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nostrum.com; s=default; t=1595450656; bh=71VLoJ1DdTVIB6r9D7+hVrO1AAUM8Vkkhg4cjDQYdy8=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To; b=Qf3Ssc1A2NVkp+Sh6/9sM0TQNmg4bQ0DMW9E1aSZOYwCTPOaxkV2yDfOknaIxNi74 hlcnA7hFKHwBxMh5/UZayYZ/6Rxo4tSKSPMmgqm0vayT8DC6LwVksIj3Q9L3znjNix Eqdiqni6QbB4PrEM5oWMrK0xE7pmExqUFink16vw= X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host [47.186.30.41] claimed to be unescapeable.local To: gendispatch@ietf.org References: <031601d65fb0$f6aa0a30$e3fe1e90$@olddog.co.uk> <22930.1595383098@localhost> From: Robert Sparks Message-ID: <4ddb8984-2754-374f-5aac-5bdc70167792@nostrum.com> Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 15:44:15 -0500 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <22930.1595383098@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Thoughts on draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 20:44:19 -0000 The text in this document should not (really, must not) constrain the group to automatically adopt _anything_. I have seen groups set up two teams to refine separate proposals with the intent that the group weigh the results against each other. Automatically adopting the output of both of those teams would have created confusion and increased friction. RjS On 7/21/20 8:58 PM, Michael Richardson wrote: > Adrian Farrel wrote: > > In this draft you have (section 3)... > > > A WG that decides to create a design team to solve a > > problem has implicitely agreed to adopt the result. To not adopt the > > result is to say that the results of the WG mandated design team does > > not deserve first class agenda time. Such a design team would have > > been created, for instance, when a WG can not decide between two > > competing individual drafts and decides to merge them. > > > s/implicitely/implicitly/ > > s/can not/cannot/ > > (fixed in my copy) > > > But I strongly disagree with this statement. I think that the DT is (very) > > often chartered to come up with a draft for the WG to consider adopting. If, > > however, as is somewhat common, the DT goes a little wild and produces a > > document that the DT likes but the WG finds unacceptable, then the document > > should not be adopted. > > I guess I disagree about the mechanicals of the process. > I really think that the DT should be charged with uploading it's work as draft-ietf-foobar-00.txt > If the WG hates the result, then the DT can be fired and a new one created. > > Adoption is not endorsement. > > > I would go as far as to say that sometimes there is an expectation that the > > output of a DT will be presented to a WG as a done decision that the WG must > > accept because "the WG chartered the DT". But a DT is "just a group of > > people working together on a draft," and the fact that the WG chartered a DT > > merely means that the WG helped form the group of people. > > I agree totally, but the WG created the design team. > If we do agenda time correctly, then the DT might get none. > > > The sentence about the "first class agenda time" also seems wrong. Yes, the > > output of the DT deserves agenda time, but if the use of that time reveals > > that the result is not up to scratch, that is good use of time and the draft > > should not be adopted. > > If it deserved agenda time, then adopt it. > > -- > ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ > ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | IoT architect [ > ] mcr@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [ > > > > > -- > Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works > -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- > > > From nobody Wed Jul 22 14:27:45 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFED63A0A00 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:27:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 qn7Col3382Tf for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:27:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wm1-x32e.google.com (mail-wm1-x32e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32e]) (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 EDB3D3A09F7 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:27:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm1-x32e.google.com with SMTP id a6so5175536wmm.0 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:27:34 -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=Oap+MxEqa/lXOa95K+xdOvzkcLf2gprWtjBJI69nUiE=; b=Z9LiDgETb2r0EyshrC1n6kndtTY1GZ98bTYScKz/FcrStepbzk+xSyFPbtiCGueSPt bphQuXtbSJozdGzLM0IJlz2c4Y53sgtugE7B3UmwesjVcc7aF+9LKb9gLQU3KgSx+TOi ve+K7vsanLUW90KHb4210tKPnTrQo7el5Gtt7PqfDkvnPR5vPx5m3S/JSRvcvWjy7C3b 1m8oV1FVdYhquQ7CIpDfdVoZeRvvydtczVCyKluIZSy1KXsW8v/kx08Q4oQndecog169 qmc5ijia3Ss1YKvwaKqWMqdYyjGIkESif8kCYqYCMvUIZNHszLwku96JTvqypWRA93Z3 5Q+A== 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=Oap+MxEqa/lXOa95K+xdOvzkcLf2gprWtjBJI69nUiE=; b=WYvxQVTaXNB3QVf/VyU9TJMXjkhL8p3GStOuZQkcWwDNPGf+g5mHG4vcpJZrlUU7z0 InxMhIKl9XCXHclpKpdLzvH+Q7w93oNW+10ran6cceEzkqY30EG0m8NgG4CgdHPZIf2P GDBH5CpPN0Emj9c8Cs9sdZhIV3gIfLA0JU5tqzS7pfAnOejwrT22wt+oVx+MqWVEGa7U hUiHbE0HKHJ4qyoK6MQWLxKntKKnxLuEiHWyKQg8t7re1z4sejPiTmt7Ql3LtUqBPLU2 tu2A3tc1KIJA60CFrIyRfhc6kXaOGuBv0815D7JP0YelaNTTkQS93jcEuu9MjPj7c1sp VVcA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532gWzueiTvQAU9uTr6CB/ekpTiSvf8o4NINAtWXQ1MKrfVpI4EB GtQx5BO5Vg63e92SGj27LyB/2vmy X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx3oQAff6jxgCmrxpgr42Ojghrz1B6y0EzOhGO131dJs4YsMKx6fzrvhe4mDdho8aYbQ+GZag== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:2144:: with SMTP id h65mr1314744wmh.84.1595453253301; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:27:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:5a00:ef0b:25be:c91f:2bf5:6b99? ([2601:647:5a00:ef0b:25be:c91f:2bf5:6b99]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f15sm885664wmj.44.2020.07.22.14.27.30 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:27:31 -0700 (PDT) From: Bob Hinden Message-Id: Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_C6EB022C-5D50-4B4D-945A-3F46ABC3E0D4"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.15\)) Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:27:21 -0700 In-Reply-To: <2EA7CD9C-F280-4D10-9AC0-5A6A880BF0EB@episteme.net> Cc: Bob Hinden , gendispatch@ietf.org To: Pete Resnick References: <2EA7CD9C-F280-4D10-9AC0-5A6A880BF0EB@episteme.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.15) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Reminder of charter / discussion limits X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 21:27:44 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_C6EB022C-5D50-4B4D-945A-3F46ABC3E0D4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Pete, > On Jul 22, 2020, at 9:43 AM, Pete Resnick = wrote: >=20 > Folks, >=20 > I just wanted to send a short reminder of our charter and what it = means for discussions on this list. >=20 > Some discussion of the contents of documents on our agenda is = certainly necessary to figure out how to dispatch them, and documents = without homes means we end up having a bit of content discussion because = there is no other place to do so yet. That said, unlike other = dispatch-style WGs, we are specifically not chartered to actually work = on documents in this WG; we're only meant to figure out where to send = them. >=20 > Please try to contain your enthusiasm about the contents of documents = until after we get them dispatched. As I said above, a bit of content = discussion is not the end of the world, but when we see 20-odd messages = on the draft-adoption draft, 9 on eligibility-expand, and 8 on = terminology, I start to worry about the rabbit hole some of us might be = jumping down. I was wondering about that too. So where should be sent (aka = dispatched)? What are the choices? Bob >=20 > One of your dutiful chairs, >=20 > pr > -- > Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ > All connections to the world are tenuous at best >=20 > -- > Gendispatch mailing list > Gendispatch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch --Apple-Mail=_C6EB022C-5D50-4B4D-945A-3F46ABC3E0D4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEm0rfRsOCoyamPexGrut0EXfnu6gFAl8YrzkACgkQrut0EXfn u6ioawf/WssTx7ZrvknScL77BuC4aqRc0pzK1v5pArVZe1kY8vO9vaQ5ESv8hRrG 5u+3Tbv9WGxLEhmurS/DhzvpW/6m4zR9qkE1KpifKPE4lQatrbc9dseCDHzw6p0/ hENMkEUMaaObV2hViUKc03lPDiXWiGi2QCxIhWsHT1BN+MeS/zfgW3JgQzbMxcf7 k7f1lYF0MkkSUseJTA/aEoOex4ho4H3f6TC+1F9dDuZ+N9k9+jefGEGi3fFt8Ani POeLqmtNp8NbvFwaQUSk+Ig5q3+QgwqARgSDZJCCgZIt7tKGj9TKSq6nxkCiJ21/ lsUqFeabqZypk8X8kBGzA0ImDvNzXQ== =CUzE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_C6EB022C-5D50-4B4D-945A-3F46ABC3E0D4-- From nobody Wed Jul 22 14:31:42 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE0823A09E4 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:31:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 QhCtp7S96kkd for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:31:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wm1-x330.google.com (mail-wm1-x330.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::330]) (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 945D83A09EC for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:31:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm1-x330.google.com with SMTP id 9so3154655wmj.5 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:31:37 -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=aDTMLXWN2YzvzfRcNvSlqdJ7EHdVpCbWC5siz5vU0N4=; b=nT0zpwaDxA+L2oxlJiyWX2/+W7p7oBLDAebCS3Wt9UYmfjGq8DTIMt5GBAaV5eZmBE zyksiPE01LgTWTYylUGnlITQpq4s8O9L6oTaLFVeHeI0aO22Bt8U5ikgLK8etp1tRoSu sZTSSX/xB1TTx0sAvUNiM8mZU/9ohm9Re3RTxBV5s/4CaUEUeZ8AwmEqBBjZNfdszoXa pjMEU1KZOQyE7uP1fUGkg1Znl08g0Ek0oRHl0MHZXaWp6k6lwh2h4t62ZotCzqZxSgs6 oZiOKUBQ+YsV6IhIx4W/lgVcWFMQh5lD7ZiTmQdfpH8QfP8LbNeJkrRjleO4Gs76YXJc vD8Q== 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=aDTMLXWN2YzvzfRcNvSlqdJ7EHdVpCbWC5siz5vU0N4=; b=OnrzQy2QcRb80+UwDK6U/e1lvAF9MKSnjeCbBrSGFpr9HsruUpc9CMYp1mIxdMKVMZ Sx8lUXq0bG7BaON7lItuzp+jhGLQUFsKHUFEQZTr8td9yM1kBpKTES4Zn+ym4ck+uMc9 bHQ0Gx2H0NCGPRHONqjpV/lKew21ZR+p0qQP8PTWho3esTNty/P8SnJkG8Qg1vvAXQcu AB78T20Tz5ejZaN1ll/2foZ2jjylSBEPMZpRqLQpM5hN91S4loNnKve62aEsYWALMJXi aJAVQ8o12CfLMuXVIxnGlD3HRWaqGYZ+YEAB4Z/mBUfBvTRDcBviUF8rGl3uC8xLF9PF ezIg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532+C66j+vE+TtcYDu/Kk0IgY+T1dYLvcVjM/lofjaJ4ooB0Yflv 0CoYbB9YEvrKIotcSUz4hM2xs4xx X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwVkgHse4aw1DAexBi7fZMr3xfPO7OgSi5+m3aorK8yfSf1OK6fVKR56AyIoGh+PbZ4f5x01A== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:62d6:: with SMTP id w205mr353990wmb.154.1595453496119; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:31:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2601:647:5a00:ef0b:25be:c91f:2bf5:6b99? ([2601:647:5a00:ef0b:25be:c91f:2bf5:6b99]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t2sm915177wma.43.2020.07.22.14.31.34 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:31:35 -0700 (PDT) From: Bob Hinden Message-Id: Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_F80AEFA5-1A52-4496-9600-3E98FB9017CF"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.15\)) Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 14:31:32 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20200722163704.8ADB21D61A46@ary.qy> Cc: Bob Hinden , gendispatch@ietf.org, adrian@olddog.co.uk To: John Levine References: <20200722163704.8ADB21D61A46@ary.qy> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.15) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-02 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 21:31:40 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_F80AEFA5-1A52-4496-9600-3E98FB9017CF Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 John, > On Jul 22, 2020, at 9:37 AM, John Levine wrote: >=20 > In article <048201d65124$fe4cd910$fae68b30$@olddog.co.uk> you write: >> Thanks, Niels and Mallory, for having the strength to persevere with = this important topic. I would >> like to see the IETF reach some fairly rapid resolution on the thrust = of your work so that we can >> advise authors and the RPC on the way we want to use language. >=20 > Having finally gotten around to reading this draft, i think there is > some good advice combined with unhelpful and sometimes ahistoric > purported motivations. >=20 > We can stop referring to things as master and slave because we think > slavery is bad. As others have noted, western hemisphere race-based > slavery is only one variety, and vast numbers of people all over the > world became enslaved because they were the wrong religion, the wrong > side at the end of a battle, the wrong sex, or just in the wrong place > at the wrong time. >=20 > Similarly, blacklist is a term that goes back to the 1500s and has > been used to sanction people for activities such as union organizing > or, in the mid-20th century US, accusations of political affiliation. > We can agree that blacklisting people is bad without making false > connections to race. >=20 > The gratuitous racial references have two other unfortunate effects: > one is to give an implicit free pass to people from other cultural > backgrounds, and they ignore terms that really are about race such as > the verbs "grandfather" and "redline". >=20 > Finally, the proposed list of substitutes isn't very good. Rather than > try and come up with others at this point, I would suggest people > think about what the thing they're describing is actually doing, and > the implications of the metaphors they use. Master/slave implies that > the slave has to do what the master says, which is usually what's > intended, but also that the master can sell the slave, which is not. > Look for something where the metaphor actually matches what it's > describing. I agree with you, I think we should stop using terminology like = master/slave, white/black list, etc, in IETF specifications. Also, that the current document needs a lot of work before it could go = forward. To Pete=E2=80=99s email, where should this work take place? Bob >=20 > R's, > John >=20 > PS: English has a perfectly good non-gendered singular pronoun but > I've given up reminding people about it. >=20 > -- > Gendispatch mailing list > Gendispatch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch --Apple-Mail=_F80AEFA5-1A52-4496-9600-3E98FB9017CF Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEm0rfRsOCoyamPexGrut0EXfnu6gFAl8YsDQACgkQrut0EXfn u6i2qgf/ViMMeowJ/5PkhDM+KM4SDxtDBe3qMegnSUYdWc1LqHKnHH4GpgZhSrRm pFiDUYHr9tYEwBxoOKZ/KrkDNgvK3tT9uGeekusdodPkLboUy1RSrRor5M9i41Sf Q+fQQUTEzy1BWcScE7vx8wst0RYwF24KEKSMHvjMbkSCJW5+WxdeXtNMvFd80Mwd uGcyLTgkDo60mDTqNizHfYR3sznO/M6jX05VpIy4EIqFp9hZ1HSBIZFq5VUadMyr EFE8S56dkmdfQ1Rrd2vQzc4Fi5ajz+rScdzWobHL6JHJlQAbhAPYQJ+CUwTPWYIz fRnoKgurNAPAXnQV4M2tWH7B/LQ52g== =NpPP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_F80AEFA5-1A52-4496-9600-3E98FB9017CF-- From nobody Wed Jul 22 17:28:52 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCBB73A0A86 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 17:28:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 KVT2jdC8wZkA for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 17:28:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pl1-x636.google.com (mail-pl1-x636.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::636]) (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 DDFF33A0A84 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 17:28:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x636.google.com with SMTP id d1so1770185plr.8 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 17:28:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=svxx3wxvsUpvqro8jeJWDMTRnOT2JPRst+njw/AnOGQ=; b=kk2W1OpPNaBkZecb6kDoh9lsgweX+jf1zOprfdkGNS/q0VB3Pr/83Nn6bKEUMcoDLs AY6sXf4bFB6q9qAJWr/BUOSoLvLX+oPucdZCmeU1hz2mhyDu6r5QfFwh7qfIV+RJvNnC DGtRxXailkRsCDg7/LNYsIAqLCdNDKSwq88nh5uk4+POIS585jGaWUAGSzro+7vgTNSH vtpa7tmRxUm0VBETIBNN0kjm7pK2hQjHw8EJ9UTnJXwrFU10hTeeOaighpVRDHNPm9ps 5nlzBPXDwIGi5aC8+iXoeZXW7WUATRUR6Lh0oAMmnDLS949ILPJJNEibX9q3homjqwbC tKuw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=svxx3wxvsUpvqro8jeJWDMTRnOT2JPRst+njw/AnOGQ=; b=Ttn9oYkFaRxtXzONZXp80FhDq2hMeJrwJKckn6ybHYQpO4k4bmWabod5Dc/pvj9AZV QocUvCs06XUZZwVZ4aLJGM9IMVDSszt/C9xkSCDYTIHxyb8azlwP06dRwwLi5moBmsJt n3H/rEmi3CDeJuUTGXcJabsnITACsrI339KGqtua9cJaHhKDGDqXXWUHAX8ZMmK+o6D2 WpfbAwlFdo81JESCnuSLH811ELMFKjYnu1UDmhFK7ig2vSJkh2OucTblEIN2Kn7IbgkE VB0xA11oWUAl+EPwA1fQVguv4GQ963D5rnF4rIA5zOdWdpVc7Q683vYALzbsj8fIiHX9 /96g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532fzwJOLth0eEzhw43YKt9tGDEb4wrnTD5vEgkH9pSMYBeqIDeF KQIBjCofgn4xbcl/U/6spvLnzUEGqFc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw3G6dZAAhTy4L1qaFpmBPA5STJCtR7Pb++C8DlEzkloP1HGZ/n328Q2Tt7e8VtBaUJxCYRcQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:62c1:: with SMTP id k1mr1824977pjs.107.1595464127860; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 17:28:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [130.216.38.179] (sc-cs-567-laptop.uoa.auckland.ac.nz. [130.216.38.179]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q11sm798621pgr.69.2020.07.22.17.28.45 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 22 Jul 2020 17:28:47 -0700 (PDT) To: Robert Sparks , gendispatch@ietf.org References: <031601d65fb0$f6aa0a30$e3fe1e90$@olddog.co.uk> <22930.1595383098@localhost> <4ddb8984-2754-374f-5aac-5bdc70167792@nostrum.com> From: Brian E Carpenter Message-ID: <4bdff8f8-c0fd-c928-8a4a-bed420d7858c@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 12:28:42 +1200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4ddb8984-2754-374f-5aac-5bdc70167792@nostrum.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Thoughts on draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 00:28:51 -0000 On 23-Jul-20 08:44, Robert Sparks wrote: > The text in this document should not (really, must not) constrain the > group to automatically adopt _anything_. > > I have seen groups set up two teams to refine separate proposals with > the intent that the group weigh the results against each other. > Automatically adopting the output of both of those teams would have > created confusion and increased friction. True. I'm thinking that the main point is that a formally appointed DT (not an informal self-starting DT) can reasonably *expect* their output to be adopted, but cannot assume it. fwiw, RFC3248 is a design team output that was published for the record, but the WG standardised RFC3246 instead. Anything can happen, and probably will. Brian > > RjS > > On 7/21/20 8:58 PM, Michael Richardson wrote: >> Adrian Farrel wrote: >> > In this draft you have (section 3)... >> >> > A WG that decides to create a design team to solve a >> > problem has implicitely agreed to adopt the result. To not adopt the >> > result is to say that the results of the WG mandated design team does >> > not deserve first class agenda time. Such a design team would have >> > been created, for instance, when a WG can not decide between two >> > competing individual drafts and decides to merge them. >> >> > s/implicitely/implicitly/ >> > s/can not/cannot/ >> >> (fixed in my copy) >> >> > But I strongly disagree with this statement. I think that the DT is (very) >> > often chartered to come up with a draft for the WG to consider adopting. If, >> > however, as is somewhat common, the DT goes a little wild and produces a >> > document that the DT likes but the WG finds unacceptable, then the document >> > should not be adopted. >> >> I guess I disagree about the mechanicals of the process. >> I really think that the DT should be charged with uploading it's work as draft-ietf-foobar-00.txt >> If the WG hates the result, then the DT can be fired and a new one created. >> >> Adoption is not endorsement. >> >> > I would go as far as to say that sometimes there is an expectation that the >> > output of a DT will be presented to a WG as a done decision that the WG must >> > accept because "the WG chartered the DT". But a DT is "just a group of >> > people working together on a draft," and the fact that the WG chartered a DT >> > merely means that the WG helped form the group of people. >> >> I agree totally, but the WG created the design team. >> If we do agenda time correctly, then the DT might get none. >> >> > The sentence about the "first class agenda time" also seems wrong. Yes, the >> > output of the DT deserves agenda time, but if the use of that time reveals >> > that the result is not up to scratch, that is good use of time and the draft >> > should not be adopted. >> >> If it deserved agenda time, then adopt it. >> >> -- >> ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ >> ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | IoT architect [ >> ] mcr@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [ >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works >> -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- >> >> >> > From nobody Wed Jul 22 19:13:46 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F7A53A0B53 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 19:13:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.896 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 Hh_jqoKSVEYy for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 19:13:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from episteme.net (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C87D3A0B51 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 19:13:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0D78B59A098; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 21:13:32 -0500 (CDT) Received: from episteme.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (episteme.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 659TlGgf_-dA; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 21:13:31 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [172.16.1.16] (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F388DB59A08C; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 21:13:30 -0500 (CDT) From: "Pete Resnick" To: "Bob Hinden" Cc: gendispatch@ietf.org Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 21:13:30 -0500 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5699) Message-ID: <9C78F8F8-49C8-4D65-98E8-C727F2EE3D89@episteme.net> In-Reply-To: References: <2EA7CD9C-F280-4D10-9AC0-5A6A880BF0EB@episteme.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_MailMate_B5C91BEB-538B-4D74-868C-257F9985B278_=" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Reminder of charter / discussion limits X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 02:13:43 -0000 --=_MailMate_B5C91BEB-538B-4D74-868C-257F9985B278_= Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; markup=markdown On 22 Jul 2020, at 16:27, Bob Hinden wrote: > On Jul 22, 2020, at 9:43 AM, Pete Resnick > wrote: >> >> Folks, >> >> I just wanted to send a short reminder of our charter and what it >> means for discussions on this list. >> >> Some discussion of the contents of documents on our agenda is >> certainly necessary to figure out how to dispatch them, and documents >> without homes means we end up having a bit of content discussion >> because there is no other place to do so yet. That said, unlike other >> dispatch-style WGs, we are specifically not chartered to actually >> work on documents in this WG; we're only meant to figure out where to >> send them. >> >> Please try to contain your enthusiasm about the contents of documents >> until after we get them dispatched. As I said above, a bit of content >> discussion is not the end of the world, but when we see 20-odd >> messages on the draft-adoption draft, 9 on eligibility-expand, and 8 >> on terminology, I start to worry about the rabbit hole some of us >> might be jumping down. > > > I was wondering about that too. So where should be sent (aka > dispatched)? > > What are the choices? Well, the charter lays out the possibilities: - Directing the work to an existing WG. - Developing a proposal for a BOF. - Developing a charter for a new WG. - Making recommendations that documents be AD-sponsored (which ADs may or may not choose to follow). - Requesting that the the IESG or the IETF LLC consider taking up the work. - Deferring the decision for the new work. - Rejecting the new work. If we suggest a new BOF or WG, that probably means pushing discussion to a new list. If AD-sponsored, it might just be a 4-week Last Call discussion on the IETF list. The discussion we should have here is if there are sufficient folks who think the work is worth going forward (with significant changes or not), and, to quote the charter, to see if we've got a "clear problem statement, historical context, motivation, and deliverables". Does that answer your question? pr -- Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ All connections to the world are tenuous at best --=_MailMate_B5C91BEB-538B-4D74-868C-257F9985B278_= Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 22 Jul 2020, at 16:27, Bob Hinden wrote:

On Jul 22, 2020, at 9:43 AM, Pete Resnick resnick@episteme.net wr= ote:

Folks,

I just wanted to send a short reminder of our charter and= what it means for discussions on this list.

Some discussion of the contents of documents on our agend= a is certainly necessary to figure out how to dispatch them, and document= s without homes means we end up having a bit of content discussion becaus= e there is no other place to do so yet. That said, unlike other dispatch-= style WGs, we are specifically not chartered to actually work on document= s in this WG; we're only meant to figure out where to send them.

Please try to contain your enthusiasm about the contents = of documents until after we get them dispatched. As I said above, a bit o= f content discussion is not the end of the world, but when we see 20-odd = messages on the draft-adoption draft, 9 on eligibility-expand, and 8 on t= erminology, I start to worry about the rabbit hole some of us might be ju= mping down.

I was wondering about that too. So where should be sent = (aka dispatched)?

What are the choices?

Well, the charter lays out the possibilities:

  • Directing the work to an existing WG.
  • Developing a proposal for a BOF.
  • Developing a charter for a new WG.
  • Making recommendations that documents be AD-sponsored (which ADs may = or may not choose to follow).
  • Requesting that the the IESG or the IETF LLC consider taking up the w= ork.
  • Deferring the decision for the new work.
  • Rejecting the new work.

If we suggest a new BOF or WG, that probably means pushin= g discussion to a new list. If AD-sponsored, it might just be a 4-week La= st Call discussion on the IETF list.

The discussion we should have here is if there are suffic= ient folks who think the work is worth going forward (with significant ch= anges or not), and, to quote the charter, to see if we've got a "clear pr= oblem statement, historical context, motivation, and deliverables".

Does that answer your question?

pr
--
Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/
All connections to the world are tenuous at best

--=_MailMate_B5C91BEB-538B-4D74-868C-257F9985B278_=-- From nobody Wed Jul 22 19:19:22 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82A463A0816 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 19:19:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 6ObY3YseLT-t for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 19:19:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from episteme.net (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF6A53A07FC for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 19:19:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A7C0B59A35F; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 21:19:18 -0500 (CDT) Received: from episteme.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (episteme.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id v_DeaGqCLTQS; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 21:19:17 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [172.16.1.16] (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9EE6EB59A356; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 21:19:17 -0500 (CDT) From: "Pete Resnick" To: "Bob Hinden" Cc: "John Levine" , gendispatch@ietf.org, adrian@olddog.co.uk Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2020 21:19:11 -0500 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5699) Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <20200722163704.8ADB21D61A46@ary.qy> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed; markup=markdown Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-02 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 02:19:21 -0000 On 22 Jul 2020, at 16:31, Bob Hinden wrote: > To Pete’s email, where should this work take place? See my other response, but this is part of the question the WG is meant to answer. Do we think we need a WG or BOF to work on this? Then we're probably going to suggest discussing on a new mailing list. If we think this belongs somewhere else, e.g., I could imagine that we decide that it should be part of the RFC Editor's responsibility, then we could ask the IETF Chair or LLC to take up the work. But we've got a whole menu of options. I'm happy to start talking about that now in addition to at our meeting next week. pr -- Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ All connections to the world are tenuous at best From nobody Wed Jul 22 22:07:24 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB3C93A0C7D for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 22:07:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.12 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.12 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lowentropy.net header.b=huz7xKn+; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=t7oFbEHg 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 eXvnAohg4tJT for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 22:07:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BAE7B3A0C7C for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2020 22:07:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8EE55C0092 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 01:07:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 23 Jul 2020 01:07:20 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :subject:content-type; s=fm2; bh=SW8euDSUnbCi1b06QedR+Sirrcum9ST BfRuA/gTwMMI=; b=huz7xKn+Cvl6n8O+XNssGH5fQ84cScY4BmtWIQ/Khe/0bWT VxF1QKR8B9wUp/tXL3DBsAZzwfknkQk7rxAPUG6O9JE4YGQlopKEbFAfpUhl75vN pSA9dVwYc11qGpL9mil8oTE8UiMAEGN1LPuUZ/SwAA7Ryj0jFPQFNT/fM/xP7wTp z80AGCmh/Bcxf34OCDuPBm+zuW2t/5FYBu1lTUSvht3aoPYTb5agWOF9mcmHa+r5 kFKS7dkPcywTotQK67r044CNdrwQFvOYcZ6QE8d+7rWbLLn61E4IoRCWfTkHkk3d y+QhwavMcEPCfpueKKmPWq+UnpfPayV1nbCR4Gw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=SW8euD SUnbCi1b06QedR+Sirrcum9STBfRuA/gTwMMI=; b=t7oFbEHgpR2zzAA2TfQj1e qGkK0cwsx2EVm/WQLONb6I2DH0Ta8YWDwM56YL1bi2yS/HNwv5E8uu9umetjZYek utC9dGtOT734ceTlldnAwNOk4iwpNR3xnlRdxeE1vLOLUyy/yAdNIeprki6QlFkK oJEpH+l5q4jz2GyC0Ec6I8PEjB5mmKNyEx6UKgZbKkHQ4ngAj3UaU7R8+upJsK2E JBafAvkRaTcW2u6EekcsIBrhnTcm9kFezXpNZ2BAlaciLDD4UYfRH9JAqkEVkp99 mzjXvPlVHJEFDJ5FuK5sWRcoRhPGXRrYF7x9S1PQQb5/SJABDeaFvXEawUr0/IfQ == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduiedrhedtgdelfecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtre dtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdforghrthhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohif vghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepheefteduudduhedtkefhvd fhteelffdujeegjeffheffveekudeigfeuveekfeelnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgep tdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 98F44E00A8; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 01:07:20 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.3.0-92-g11c785d-fm-20200721.004-g11c785d5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <62184213-6fae-474b-a23e-1a4ca18721da@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4bdff8f8-c0fd-c928-8a4a-bed420d7858c@gmail.com> References: <031601d65fb0$f6aa0a30$e3fe1e90$@olddog.co.uk> <22930.1595383098@localhost> <4ddb8984-2754-374f-5aac-5bdc70167792@nostrum.com> <4bdff8f8-c0fd-c928-8a4a-bed420d7858c@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 15:06:59 +1000 From: "Martin Thomson" To: gendispatch@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] =?utf-8?q?Thoughts_on_draft-carpenter-gendispatch-?= =?utf-8?q?draft-adoption?= X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 05:07:23 -0000 On Thu, Jul 23, 2020, at 10:28, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > True. I'm thinking that the main point is that a formally appointed > DT (not an informal self-starting DT) can reasonably *expect* their > output to be adopted, but cannot assume it. There might be an assumption here, and I'm sure that in most cases a draft that is the product of a formalized DT will be adopted. But it's a bad assumption. The only true measure here is that the WG has consensus to adopt. I'm surprised that the draft doesn't put that up front. It's there, but buried. Given that this is the yardstick that has been uniformly used - at least in my experience - I think it would be remiss not to mention it. BTW, I think that the general concept is fine, just not this DT point. From nobody Thu Jul 23 00:05:30 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 757FA3A09B5 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 00:05:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.918 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.918 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.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 zWLSC1KyIlZQ for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 00:05:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4E22A3A09A9 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 00:05:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AD4869B for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 03:05:24 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 23 Jul 2020 03:05:24 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=gvpD8x F0osieRE1AN0h0qUkt/GN1ASScRfB1LvxyJvQ=; b=mxRV31oUhR+iTqRyjHALMs v+Q2G3iKIeWnMJHquFhKjmhiCpHak6eck0vWSjDsAl57HoPDCckTfyLMxDehwQ14 mKBBep/TpODdu2kHATCeRjj8X6PsRq8jeSYtkPswHd1CofpQsZxp6Y4zlw27qcoI he/VUZgk21po8HVnxPig/wUpZssUDG63ValPyyF8Woay8GwoJyCQ9ZDDMjaaNhzh CcdHpjp+gMbKLXnNRZT82NkbJcHMXAKY/gTwcJXy+LHT74CMUVwXyGkzYnKMOm+F naKm0Xf4upHH1q0VuBRyzJPYRqbSRd/3NOcwsbpJ7mWZankeN77l+BnwiewR9RKA == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduiedrhedtgdduudekucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefuvfhfhffkffgfgggjtgesrgdtre ertdefjeenucfhrhhomhepmfgvihhthhcuofhoohhrvgcuoehmohhorhgvsehnvghtfiho rhhkqdhhvghrvghtihgtshdrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepveefteduieegtd elvddvtddufeejjeffvdefteejieeulefgtdfggedtffektedunecukfhppedutdekrddv vddurddukedtrdduheenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrih hlfhhrohhmpehmohhorhgvsehnvghtfihorhhkqdhhvghrvghtihgtshdrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: Received: from [192.168.1.85] (108-221-180-15.lightspeed.knvltn.sbcglobal.net [108.221.180.15]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 99B3430600A6 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 03:05:23 -0400 (EDT) To: gendispatch@ietf.org References: <031601d65fb0$f6aa0a30$e3fe1e90$@olddog.co.uk> <22930.1595383098@localhost> <4ddb8984-2754-374f-5aac-5bdc70167792@nostrum.com> <4bdff8f8-c0fd-c928-8a4a-bed420d7858c@gmail.com> From: Keith Moore Message-ID: <2582d94a-6249-4988-8512-3723cab1efec@network-heretics.com> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 03:05:23 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4bdff8f8-c0fd-c928-8a4a-bed420d7858c@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------00E8AA382D9CF5C412D64B4E" Content-Language: en-US Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Thoughts on draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 07:05:29 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------00E8AA382D9CF5C412D64B4E Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 7/22/20 8:28 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >> I have seen groups set up two teams to refine separate proposals with >> the intent that the group weigh the results against each other. >> Automatically adopting the output of both of those teams would have >> created confusion and increased friction. > True. I'm thinking that the main point is that a formally appointed > DT (not an informal self-starting DT) can reasonably*expect* their > output to be adopted, but cannot assume it. IMO even this states it a bit too strongly.    IMO a DT should not be used as a political tool to convince a WG to adopt a particular document or documents.  So there should be no presumption whatsoever that a DT's output will be adopted.   It should be treated as a proposal, nothing more, and alternative proposals should be welcomed. More generally, I have often seen the "adoption of a draft" question as an undesirable short-circuiting of the IETF process, as WGs often seem to be asked to adopt a draft before there's any shared sense of the problem or the potential solution space.   I have a similar view of the practice of naming a draft in a WG's charter as the presumed starting basis of the group's output. I understand why WG chairs and IESG want to avoid having WGs wander around, seemingly aimlessly, struggling to find a common direction.   But I don't think early adoption of a draft by a WG serves the Internet community most of the time.   I'd rather see a discussion period followed by an invitation to people to submit proposals, with the understanding that the WG may want to combine 2 or more of the proposals rather than pick a clear winner. Keith --------------00E8AA382D9CF5C412D64B4E Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On 7/22/20 8:28 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

I have seen groups set up two teams to refine separate proposals with 
the intent that the group weigh the results against each other. 
Automatically adopting the output of both of those teams would have 
created confusion and increased friction.

True.  I'm thinking that the main point is that a formally appointed
DT (not an informal self-starting DT) can reasonably *expect* their
output to be adopted, but cannot assume it.

IMO even this states it a bit too strongly.    IMO a DT should not be used as a political tool to convince a WG to adopt a particular document or documents.  So there should be no presumption whatsoever that a DT's output will be adopted.   It should be treated as a proposal, nothing more, and alternative proposals should be welcomed.

More generally, I have often seen the "adoption of a draft" question as an undesirable short-circuiting of the IETF process, as WGs often seem to be asked to adopt a draft before there's any shared sense of the problem or the potential solution space.   I have a similar view of the practice of naming a draft in a WG's charter as the presumed starting basis of the group's output.  

I understand why WG chairs and IESG want to avoid having WGs wander around, seemingly aimlessly, struggling to find a common direction.   But I don't think early adoption of a draft by a WG serves the Internet community most of the time.   I'd rather see a discussion period followed by an invitation to people to submit proposals, with the understanding that the WG may want to combine 2 or more of the proposals rather than pick a clear winner.

Keith


--------------00E8AA382D9CF5C412D64B4E-- From nobody Thu Jul 23 03:35:52 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BF323A0811; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 03:35:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.622 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.622 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.267, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no 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 qWMk1O2DXtEb; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 03:35:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tools.si6networks.com (v6toolkit.go6lab.si [IPv6:2001:67c:27e4::57]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A5BD3A080A; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 03:35:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [IPv6:2800:810:464:1f7:f51d:9a65:5fc2:4b87] (unknown [IPv6:2800:810:464:1f7:f51d:9a65:5fc2:4b87]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by tools.si6networks.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C1BE83FFFD; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 12:35:43 +0200 (CEST) To: adrian@olddog.co.uk, 'Michael Richardson' , gendispatch@ietf.org, draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption@ietf.org References: <031601d65fb0$f6aa0a30$e3fe1e90$@olddog.co.uk> <22930.1595383098@localhost> <036b01d66003$b2cc4c30$1864e490$@olddog.co.uk> From: Fernando Gont Message-ID: <64b85c4a-dd2f-ed84-27f8-fbe77aa05b02@gont.com.ar> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 07:34:07 -0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <036b01d66003$b2cc4c30$1864e490$@olddog.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Thoughts on draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:35:51 -0000 On 22/7/20 05:40, Adrian Farrel wrote: > Michael, > > I think what you are saying (or what we should agree upon) is that different > WGs run their work differently. It would be a shame, IMHO, to mandate the > micromanagement of WGs to this level. IOW, sometimes the draft would get > implicitly adopted, sometimes the chairs would adopted it by fiat, sometimes > the WG would discuss it before adoption: leave it up to the chairs to decide > how to run each situation with different DTs in different WGs. I don't think the intent is to micro-manage, but rather to set constraints, and establish a common ground. Recently I have seen the following as part of adoption calls: * Folks arguing support/not support with a different understanding of what adoption actually means * Chairs rejecting to do a wg call for adoption as a result of the personal opinion about a document * Documents being adopted without a consensus call on the mailing list (and no previous action item in the charter or anything) ...and quite a few others. Yes, when everything works as expected, it might seem that specifying stuff is unnecessary or even undesirable. But in other cases, it may become evident why not setting a common-ground, common expectations, and constraints within which the wg needs to operate becomes evident. Thanks, -- Fernando Gont e-mail: fernando@gont.com.ar || fgont@si6networks.com PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1 From nobody Thu Jul 23 06:17:25 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 171813A0AB4 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 06:17:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.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 hPhfT8seS7SH for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 06:17:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9001:583::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 288013A0A56 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 06:17:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0122333.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 06ND8cx6015256; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 14:17:21 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=W42RUays1TYGFdZdAHmtlLR7X2Z/IMekarzUrVgdY84=; b=dvgHWn/0qDXVIb+V5e5QsT45k/6AEHq1CGOuyLuoCKG2pp9tHPFp1CM79r2Ju2Eh1tWm j4gguaeQneuvPgILDbPxk1hvCG/p2pukElDbpwGWZ7E9ebPrvzQYqZ5eZjP6M4ig8LOv bj334TVf9gBRa86Ss64wMb+dReMBWDbsLD4k4aHuEw7aBjwW4aOkhpCf6qRWsaPspXxV gEGoCxRbmEaC4xMQEZgUF4AhZ/djQ876ztRdBkRDpsuE4Pm20kwaidJCNTnXPU3duifx 7oF6/T8t8SbWfjTqVj8+aknJVv1kmUCknJ2X2enWErRnSZnLQV7Fn/0GY/1FUZtbcqOu PQ== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint5 (prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com [184.51.33.60] (may be forged)) by mx0a-00190b01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 32bs925npm-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 23 Jul 2020 14:17:21 +0100 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 06ND1fID019913; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 06:17:20 -0700 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.30]) by prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com with ESMTP id 32dmp9pp3c-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 23 Jul 2020 06:17:20 -0700 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.2; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 09:17:19 -0400 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.006; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 09:17:19 -0400 From: "Salz, Rich" To: Pete Resnick CC: "gendispatch@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-02 Thread-Index: AQHWYEZc393cZiFfpUCJqc/OwiHJwakUYXAAgABQX4CAAHTSAA== Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 13:17:18 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20200722163704.8ADB21D61A46@ary.qy> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.38.20061401 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.19.32.182] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <3066F3A52F7AD945A44BFEA7BA10AF55@akamai.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235, 18.0.687 definitions=2020-07-23_05:2020-07-23, 2020-07-23 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxscore=0 bulkscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=609 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2007230095 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.235, 18.0.687 definitions=2020-07-23_05:2020-07-23, 2020-07-23 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=576 impostorscore=0 spamscore=0 bulkscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 clxscore=1015 malwarescore=0 priorityscore=1501 phishscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2006250000 definitions=main-2007230098 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-02 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 13:17:24 -0000 PiBJJ20gaGFwcHkgdG8gc3RhcnQgdGFsa2luZyBhYm91dCB0aGF0IG5vdyBpbiBhZGRpdGlvbiB0 byBhdCBvdXIgbWVldGluZyBuZXh0IHdlZWsuDQoNCldoYXQgZG8geW91IHRoaW5rIGFib3V0IGFz a2luZyB0aGUgSUFCIHRvIHN0YXJ0IGFuIGluY2x1c2l2aXR5IHByb2dyYW0/DQoNCg== From nobody Thu Jul 23 07:06:37 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F1B63A053E for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 07:06:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.918 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.918 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.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 AK6EC0__Iz6u for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 07:06:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout5-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.21]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1DBA13A0496 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 07:06:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59B65C02 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:06:33 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:06:33 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=aDj3UV 3OriP0q5f7PxYX0F3LmMuEl9l0L0rJpu7NiQI=; b=dIj9Wi1rJbxeHjsJdVmfIw ol1Aw0U2j6PG+tsu5Kgvmu7SoL8pIWY386dT4qilG3DvhirSzEBJVX3ButmwzYJa mj4qki0cSfgQi8IIaWIiBEDeIp9IKgU64NJJ4aZz3A2S+2dWU316REjE/HbAZQD9 PiJ64TIMzzQWO1khIZ8DkCJYKPdPVfDzfo+acsyOjAEhOj3kxRXs0k40upns8yqZ NH5nDgQOedGpZcdEqCfmZBT+0dcRek2Pmu1gYTO2uIKnlPDSdMUmwi8B+XFzSs0C Dfoeg8Xgx9VrIK/5RiFbLK//cVtuhMmQrQKbq6GKrg0IOegIk4gvDONQP3lJv45Q == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduiedrhedugdejhecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepuffvfhfhkffffgggjggtsegrtderre dtfeejnecuhfhrohhmpefmvghithhhucfoohhorhgvuceomhhoohhrvgesnhgvthifohhr khdqhhgvrhgvthhitghsrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeevfeetudeigedtle dvvddtudefjeejffdvfeetjeeiueelgfdtgfegtdffkeetudenucfkphepuddtkedrvddv uddrudektddrudehnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilh hfrhhomhepmhhoohhrvgesnhgvthifohhrkhdqhhgvrhgvthhitghsrdgtohhm X-ME-Proxy: Received: from [192.168.1.85] (108-221-180-15.lightspeed.knvltn.sbcglobal.net [108.221.180.15]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 3C43D30600B4 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:06:32 -0400 (EDT) To: gendispatch@ietf.org References: <918E1DAE-A409-40D0-A7FF-EFC5CFDA77C4@akamai.com> From: Keith Moore Message-ID: Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:06:31 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <918E1DAE-A409-40D0-A7FF-EFC5CFDA77C4@akamai.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------E2A1110AECF6B75F134322E7" Content-Language: en-US Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-03 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 14:06:35 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------E2A1110AECF6B75F134322E7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 7/22/20 10:35 AM, Salz, Rich wrote: > I am replying to Dan’s note, but the email threading does not work > because I just joined this list. > > >   The idea that elite white, northern Europeans are going to clean up > gendered language for the rest of the world is also quite presumptive. > > No.  We are cleaning up the mess that we created. > I don't have specific objections to this document.   Language inevitably changes from time to time and I've seen it change to far worse effect than seems likely for the changes proposed, and for far worse reasons.    The changes proposed are minimal and IMO not terribly disruptive. However, while I think this change is mostly harmless, I also think it's naive to presume that this kind of change will do much good in the grand scheme of things.   This isn't "cleaning up the mess", so much as something else: maybe avoiding distraction, maybe virtue signaling.  (I'm fine with avoiding distraction, less fine with virtue signaling, but doubt that it's worth the effort to split that particular hair.) Still, I think the better path is to just do this with minimal fuss and be done with it.   The dangerous pitfall that we need to avoid is to insist on constantly policing language for an increasing number of increasingly dubious reasons. Keith --------------E2A1110AECF6B75F134322E7 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On 7/22/20 10:35 AM, Salz, Rich wrote:

I am replying to Dan’s note, but the email threading does not work because I just joined this list.

 

>   The idea that elite white, northern Europeans are going to clean up gendered language for the rest of the world is also quite presumptive.

 

No.  We are cleaning up the mess that we created.

I don't have specific objections to this document.   Language inevitably changes from time to time and I've seen it change to far worse effect than seems likely for the changes proposed, and for far worse reasons.    The changes proposed are minimal and IMO not terribly disruptive.

However, while I think this change is mostly harmless, I also think it's naive to presume that this kind of change will do much good in the grand scheme of things.   This isn't "cleaning up the mess", so much as something else: maybe avoiding distraction, maybe virtue signaling.  (I'm fine with avoiding distraction, less fine with virtue signaling, but doubt that it's worth the effort to split that particular hair.)

Still, I think the better path is to just do this with minimal fuss and be done with it.   The dangerous pitfall that we need to avoid is to insist on constantly policing language for an increasing number of increasingly dubious reasons. 

Keith


--------------E2A1110AECF6B75F134322E7-- From nobody Thu Jul 23 09:09:13 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C1113A0B8D for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 09:09:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.902 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.902 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 S5VxvXPO_3Ld for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 09:09:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.goatley.com (www.goatley.com [198.137.202.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9B7A3A0B8C for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 09:09:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from trixy.bergandi.net (cpe-76-93-158-174.san.res.rr.com [76.93.158.174]) by wwwlocal.goatley.com (PMDF V6.8 #2433) with ESMTP id <0QDX00194JJA8G@wwwlocal.goatley.com> for gendispatch@ietf.org; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 11:09:10 -0500 (CDT) Received: from Dans-MacBook-Pro.local ([69.12.173.8]) by trixy.bergandi.net (PMDF V6.7-x01 #2433) with ESMTPSA id <0QDX00257JEKMO@trixy.bergandi.net> for gendispatch@ietf.org; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 09:06:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 69-12-173-8.static.dsltransport.net ([69.12.173.8] EXTERNAL) (EHLO Dans-MacBook-Pro.local) with TLS/SSL by trixy.bergandi.net ([10.0.42.18]) (PreciseMail V3.3); Thu, 23 Jul 2020 09:06:20 -0700 Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 09:09:08 -0700 From: Dan Harkins In-reply-to: To: gendispatch@ietf.org Message-id: <6ce5efeb-c1d7-3c2e-17c7-432c3a5f66f8@lounge.org> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-language: en-US Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 X-PMAS-SPF: SPF check skipped for authenticated session (recv=trixy.bergandi.net, send-ip=69.12.173.8) X-PMAS-External-Auth: 69-12-173-8.static.dsltransport.net [69.12.173.8] (EHLO Dans-MacBook-Pro.local) References: <20200722163704.8ADB21D61A46@ary.qy> X-PMAS-Software: PreciseMail V3.3 [200722] (trixy.bergandi.net) X-PMAS-Allowed: system rule (rule allow header:X-PMAS-External noexists) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-02 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 16:09:12 -0000   Hi Pete, On 7/22/20 7:19 PM, Pete Resnick wrote: > On 22 Jul 2020, at 16:31, Bob Hinden wrote: > >> To Pete’s email, where should this work take place? > > See my other response, but this is part of the question the WG is > meant to answer. Do we think we need a WG or BOF to work on this? Then > we're probably going to suggest discussing on a new mailing list. If > we think this belongs somewhere else, e.g., I could imagine that we > decide that it should be part of the RFC Editor's responsibility, then > we could ask the IETF Chair or LLC to take up the work. But we've got > a whole menu of options. I'm happy to start talking about that now in > addition to at our meeting next week.   Well I hope one of the choices on the menu is rejection of the new work. That was mentioned as a possibility laid out by the charter in your previous email. And I hope I'm not out-of-line assuming that your offer of beginning talking about the menu of options for the terminology draft includes rejection. So assuming....   In its current form I think the draft should be rejected. The racial references are unfounded and gratuitous. Their presence in the draft is divisive. The attack on some random person, by name!, for a comment on a blog in 2008 is extremely unprofessional (12 years is a long time, Barack Obama was saying that "marriage is between a man and a woman" back in 2008, the kind of thing that would get you drummed out of polite society in 2020). We don't need to bring cancel culture into the IETF.   I did recommend some changes to the draft that I think would make it less objectionable-- remove all the accusations of racism and the discussion of race and language, rewrite the draft to be more about getting rid of bad metaphors which may not have universal understanding-- but that would also remove the potential for virtue signaling and remove the need for having purges of bad words that represent bad think.   So I guess from my perspective it depends on what the authors want. Do they want to establish the word police to hunt out bad think (and bad thinkers!) or do they just want clearer and more descriptive metaphors used in RFCs?   regards,   Dan. From nobody Thu Jul 23 10:20:22 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1C8A3A0AE7; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:20:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 Uxfvlk8jPfXL; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:20:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49B8E3A0AE5; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:20:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C70D38A40; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 12:59:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id mQyWegjAamgs; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 12:59:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0616538A2A; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 12:59:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2971B9A; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 13:20:14 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Richardson To: Fernando Gont , adrian@olddog.co.uk, gendispatch@ietf.org, draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption@ietf.org In-Reply-To: <64b85c4a-dd2f-ed84-27f8-fbe77aa05b02@gont.com.ar> References: <031601d65fb0$f6aa0a30$e3fe1e90$@olddog.co.uk> <22930.1595383098@localhost> <036b01d66003$b2cc4c30$1864e490$@olddog.co.uk> <64b85c4a-dd2f-ed84-27f8-fbe77aa05b02@gont.com.ar> X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1 X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Thoughts on draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 17:20:20 -0000 --==-=-= Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-=" --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Fernando Gont wrote: > * Documents being adopted without a consensus call on the mailing list (and > no previous action item in the charter or anything) Chairs *ARE* allowed to do this according to the current guidelines. Many chairs and many participants don't know this. It's something that I want to preserve. I would further say that the Adoption Call is just the chairs asking for objections before just adopting a document. --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Disposition: inline Content-Description: Signature -- Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- --=-=-=-- --==-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEbsyLEzg/qUTA43uogItw+93Q3WUFAl8Zxs0ACgkQgItw+93Q 3WXJQAf/bKa+zpaX7SLCMPptWkRvQArz7RfRqroP7y4Bpq+2l2yzrs7hR7g5PmJY odVHvlmchj+WWm+35yWmJAsiUEtjHa8LvJlZ06h5ff5RhynkfbzJf6FPwd4+IQlV KVHj8POHuk4qihMFMfrDw4S+32uYQOkQjbTRXViHHDH/d79ICLIyHkCYeJgDjQUO av6z9jxNiph0YP0IWJRdIOyq6k8yvTyCnESKJsa6a8VsBLG4gqlrAZVeoYA88206 XIHk1CJUMIo/8yyK0j3ZMoKcPd9Bhl0KLBpLCrbiQcCMT0D9CcUv+T/7kL5magFi eEzY+SJvUIkDod5osAEaJEqnbw0ppQ== =iZlr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==-=-=-- From nobody Thu Jul 23 10:27:41 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBD5B3A0BF6 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:27:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.631 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.631 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.267, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no 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 a-KQ1UeSQ9-e for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:27:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (br1.CN84in.dnsmgr.net [69.59.192.140]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 06B073A0BF5 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:27:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id 06NHRRJs052921; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:27:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ietf@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from ietf@localhost) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id 06NHRRGR052920; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:27:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ietf) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <202007231727.06NHRRGR052920@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> In-Reply-To: To: "Salz, Rich" Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:27:27 -0700 (PDT) CC: Pete Resnick , "gendispatch@ietf.org" X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL121h (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-02 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 17:27:40 -0000 > > I'm happy to start talking about that now in addition to at our meeting next week. > > What do you think about asking the IAB to start an inclusivity program? I think the idea is OK, but the what you called it is the wrong tone, inclusivity is not what should be done here, what should be done is the reduction of exclusivity. Inclusivity is an unbounded problem, reduction of exclusivity is fairly well bounded. -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org From nobody Thu Jul 23 10:36:51 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E3E03A0C9B for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:36:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.089 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.089 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable 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 tu_u9yRqaluX for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:36:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-qk1-x734.google.com (mail-qk1-x734.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::734]) (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 77BAB3A0C94 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:36:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk1-x734.google.com with SMTP id b79so6125243qkg.9 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:36:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cdt.org; s=google; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-language; bh=WuKBn5IRSsbC2GJC/3a7SVNg88dKTzLc4TKRVP0Uvog=; b=hvwf/k41nKlPtNsjxUPm2bWYZ+IBVBtG0aGm2WSXCWB21qRyw8OCirqhwyRQ6qaE0b m3f8jU8/p5oGjAYZFhCZx/j76006+1dkHs3v/bz6gr6/X7+cJbAM2E9x9fmdhqcbVvdM sAfHbOcOTclFNgMVVd/bmO8BR+jxRSjuWR/ec= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding :content-language; bh=WuKBn5IRSsbC2GJC/3a7SVNg88dKTzLc4TKRVP0Uvog=; b=oRnxppxoHIIPjScuKkUUWz9rRi7bPEBX6qHpCRifmZKvFnLVIng4VtO1gkKH2pYyFr x7n1fgye2qQUIxpRYUqgaVzAL0KMnecqw4ErsHObBvx5soWmavigtyIrBUu3wfEiEy7l qgyuvsVL6P7iI28XawjW98V3NXaFEiRlOa+sznB+iqzvlSW6uSXl2QjMzrFAOuPpT/Q+ p2RYrDxjQOIlLMHqU7XjOnlXmrZDpa2n76+TX67XHmElQkxtGjjXIhE+1Vd7Z9AcZKlp we6B0W1L9i8Vw+pflG2TXaz8xYmozpKCysbzk3ylp2ns8r1StM6++fyW8F2/iYbOS4me WNbQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532HdR5u3beiI+weOw46LXA9OuYg/Z/jkC727XnhQr0E4XgW9jzY ZEKlMBoAnvIgyxcOCoUKDdTIKQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzezuYeykc1jFvnvVyaA5wAzL1TSwmdixHld1P9tN9tqiDQ2H1t8ujzoohwvP2Uk4He5tQ0Gg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:24e:: with SMTP id q14mr4878845qkn.482.1595525807530; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:36:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Mallorys-MacBook-Air.local (c-73-163-188-207.hsd1.dc.comcast.net. [73.163.188.207]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w4sm3218398qtc.5.2020.07.23.10.36.46 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:36:47 -0700 (PDT) To: "Rodney W. Grimes" , "Salz, Rich" Cc: "gendispatch@ietf.org" , Pete Resnick References: <202007231727.06NHRRGR052920@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> From: Mallory Knodel Message-ID: <54ff70cc-19fd-e18f-3522-4a2d6f97d6f2@cdt.org> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 13:36:46 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:79.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/79.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <202007231727.06NHRRGR052920@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Language: en-US Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-02 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 17:36:50 -0000 On 7/23/20 1:27 PM, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: >>> I'm happy to start talking about that now in addition to at our meeting next week. >> What do you think about asking the IAB to start an inclusivity program? > I think the idea is OK, but the what you called it is the wrong tone, > inclusivity is not what should be done here, what should be done is the > reduction of exclusivity. > > Inclusivity is an unbounded problem, reduction of exclusivity is fairly > well bounded. I'm heartened to respond to such a suggestion; thanks for making it. I would offer the knowledge that there are many such programmes in existence and true experts on whom we could rely for best practice. Many of those experts would tell you that inclusivity and reducing exclusivity go hand in hand. Lowering barriers to entry is only one part of the feat-- equality in representation is a bootstrap. I'd like to continue thinking of innovative ways to dispatch this work further. -Mallory -- Mallory Knodel CTO, Center for Democracy and Technology gpg fingerprint :: E3EB 63E0 65A3 B240 BCD9 B071 0C32 A271 BD3C C780 From nobody Thu Jul 23 10:40:07 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4B3C3A0C06 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:40:05 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.631 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.631 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.267, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no 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 0hA0i4czPF1Q for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:40:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (br1.CN84in.dnsmgr.net [69.59.192.140]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A192A3A0C02 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:40:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id 06NHe3gY052972; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:40:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ietf@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from ietf@localhost) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.13.3/8.13.3/Submit) id 06NHe37N052971; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:40:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ietf) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <202007231740.06NHe37N052971@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> In-Reply-To: <6ce5efeb-c1d7-3c2e-17c7-432c3a5f66f8@lounge.org> To: Dan Harkins Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 10:40:03 -0700 (PDT) CC: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL121h (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-02 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 17:40:06 -0000 Hello Dan, Since you have brought up what I consider an excellent path forward twice now, I want to chime in with a voice of support for your tactic on what might be the best path forward for this type of work. Though I must state the draft is better than most things I have read on this subject, it still fells a bit wrong from my perspective as well. You summarize this fairly well in your feedback. I do like the idea of addressing the poor quality metaphore problem is a sound path that would benifit the quality of the RFC documents. Regards, Rod Grimes > ? Hi Pete, > > On 7/22/20 7:19 PM, Pete Resnick wrote: > > On 22 Jul 2020, at 16:31, Bob Hinden wrote: > > > >> To Pete?s email, where should this work take place? > > > > See my other response, but this is part of the question the WG is > > meant to answer. Do we think we need a WG or BOF to work on this? Then > > we're probably going to suggest discussing on a new mailing list. If > > we think this belongs somewhere else, e.g., I could imagine that we > > decide that it should be part of the RFC Editor's responsibility, then > > we could ask the IETF Chair or LLC to take up the work. But we've got > > a whole menu of options. I'm happy to start talking about that now in > > addition to at our meeting next week. > > ? Well I hope one of the choices on the menu is rejection of the new > work. That > was mentioned as a possibility laid out by the charter in your previous > email. > And I hope I'm not out-of-line assuming that your offer of beginning > talking about > the menu of options for the terminology draft includes rejection. So > assuming.... > > ? In its current form I think the draft should be rejected. The racial > references > are unfounded and gratuitous. Their presence in the draft is divisive. > The attack > on some random person, by name!, for a comment on a blog in 2008 is > extremely > unprofessional (12 years is a long time, Barack Obama was saying that > "marriage > is between a man and a woman" back in 2008, the kind of thing that would > get you > drummed out of polite society in 2020). We don't need to bring cancel > culture > into the IETF. Agreed, if it was up for WG adoption it should be rejected in its present form based on your assertions. > > ? I did recommend some changes to the draft that I think would make it less > objectionable-- remove all the accusations of racism and the discussion > of race > and language, rewrite the draft to be more about getting rid of bad > metaphors > which may not have universal understanding-- but that would also remove the > potential for virtue signaling and remove the need for having purges of > bad words > that represent bad think. +1 again, the key being "getting rid of bad metaphors." > > ? So I guess from my perspective it depends on what the authors want. > Do they want > to establish the word police to hunt out bad think (and bad thinkers!) > or do they > just want clearer and more descriptive metaphors used in RFCs? > > ? regards, > > ? Dan. Regards, -- Rod Grimes rgrimes@freebsd.org From nobody Thu Jul 23 11:10:49 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 779F13A0CAE; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 11:10:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.121 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.121 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.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 eS9-x8e60FzA; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 11:10:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from maila1.tigertech.net (maila1.tigertech.net [208.80.4.151]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7172F3A0CC3; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 11:10:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by maila1.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BCL3g1bncz4TDrb; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 11:10:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1595527839; bh=kFKBQ8HjqGB39V0ucgIuHcXUyTLTlS/0BsKTKYYXv3s=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=A5/dvb5xdcTrhz8R+QcC7T0nTPvE1tA5toTAg8yq3yWFTnQCNu3ege3Lurji1FmIy IC+8i1sFHAf+/P25hDwtoqvzGgT3dB196SiJCxS64P00w8jHBpIOE3V7on6GPT+I9R q/oHo1zJt27hRBX/1ISUFPHAPn7ZdWtA7PTZqY1g= X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at a1.tigertech.net Received: from [192.168.128.43] (209-255-163-147.ip.mcleodusa.net [209.255.163.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by maila1.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4BCL3d1VjMz4TDbj; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 11:10:37 -0700 (PDT) To: Michael Richardson , Fernando Gont , adrian@olddog.co.uk, gendispatch@ietf.org, draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption@ietf.org References: <031601d65fb0$f6aa0a30$e3fe1e90$@olddog.co.uk> <22930.1595383098@localhost> <036b01d66003$b2cc4c30$1864e490$@olddog.co.uk> <64b85c4a-dd2f-ed84-27f8-fbe77aa05b02@gont.com.ar> <13414.1595524814@localhost> From: "Joel M. Halpern" Message-ID: <2f20fccc-6136-1c48-aa3c-8fd9be5eb053@joelhalpern.com> Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 14:10:36 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <13414.1595524814@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Thoughts on draft-carpenter-gendispatch-draft-adoption X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 18:10:48 -0000 My understanding of WG document adoption is a stronger statement than "no objection". First and foremost, it is an agreement by the working group that the given document is a (not "the", but at least "a") good place to start working on the topic. Second, when I as chair run such a call I expect to see enough interest that I believe the working group will work on the document. As far as I know, those expectations are the (to a reasonable approximation) the communities expectation for the meaning. Yours, Joel On 7/23/2020 1:20 PM, Michael Richardson wrote: > > Fernando Gont wrote: > > * Documents being adopted without a consensus call on the mailing list (and > > no previous action item in the charter or anything) > > Chairs *ARE* allowed to do this according to the current guidelines. > > Many chairs and many participants don't know this. > It's something that I want to preserve. > I would further say that the Adoption Call is just the chairs asking for > objections before just adopting a document. > > > > -- > Michael Richardson , Sandelman Software Works > -= IPv6 IoT consulting =- > > > > From nobody Thu Jul 23 12:00:58 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 072A53A0CE0 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 12:00:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.12 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.12 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cooperw.in header.b=fag+ytgE; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=dRXcR1Ad 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 6agEh0oK7ZAM for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 12:00:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout1-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.24]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7E0D73A0D39 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 12:00:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FB9F1639; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 15:00:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 23 Jul 2020 15:00:37 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm3; bh=J Xx0jka7Cao+MKuFSsXaRu6rsiGLF3TDETLyb/k4xP0=; b=fag+ytgEko8Qoh6yS hHW8+0UFSx1+rJMq3TDhP9fL0XuAxrLkqcj6qn4+tJSaSS7lqSNdFP3s8l7goXx7 7PM1rLXwQSdjaDk9dimNdERGV04V/XDQYlTPXWal0k3tCod08F+9xTVhgB2x7TxN M8QGZ7LQnhIz6CYM0tTQLHBQ9aoCy72LSNR7XqA+5WGVhZQiqfguz5Km4KoRyosx mfaJwKipH8qoKl/3plGTKouPgUqKnzQLDtvfkuKBTARZ2ywO8Z0NU7yzCNpk34MG Z1NdhjFFbqxeXdOT2fl4MvycxEPlS5PtXxaH3DurGoRu3esCrmys8VLxUOWDQLKl YL2Mg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=JXx0jka7Cao+MKuFSsXaRu6rsiGLF3TDETLyb/k4x P0=; b=dRXcR1AdQu3WEtnKLUE4ymzKPLppbaQgNFRS413ec0oZcIhEZEpQsSCS5 Fu4HWN0QZeHajcUP6aYxNT1kDfAtVpSFBmV0U4gJB9U0dBW+Y+3ecRlb2C9HEzNL PjNss70VDcw5emyDCNCUdmF/9wFTRWxX5FIhuN6JEy9lgqye4j168iw932PtvZUw ANeyan02BU1OI91A3U6k9Jxy47IdXJ5Y27KtW1hmRacDU+WoweqZZSOoDS/6AnmX nH1MLXhreO1QQtWY9QK8HXstDtle6r9XaDhAuDvYmO9gMcWaPsQo6aLSpDGEO5bn 3Mi+Nvpoe3HdB496mHW47ZOnNZmww== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduiedrhedugddufeeiucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurheptggguffhjgffgffkfhfvofesthhqmhdthhdtjeenucfhrhhomheptehlihhs shgrucevohhophgvrhcuoegrlhhishhsrgestghoohhpvghrfidrihhnqeenucggtffrrg htthgvrhhnpeeiteduleekleevhedvfeduleetfefffeeiueefudfgteevvdelteelvdev jeettdenucffohhmrghinhepihgvthhfrdhorhhgpdgvphhishhtvghmvgdrnhgvthenuc fkphepuddtkedrhedurddutddurdelkeenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgr rhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpegrlhhishhsrgestghoohhpvghrfidrihhn X-ME-Proxy: Received: from alcoop-m-c46z.fios-router.home (pool-108-51-101-98.washdc.fios.verizon.net [108.51.101.98]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 052BB306005F; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 15:00:36 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.5\)) From: Alissa Cooper In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 15:00:34 -0400 Cc: gendispatch@ietf.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20200722163704.8ADB21D61A46@ary.qy> To: Pete Resnick X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.5) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-02 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 19:00:57 -0000 > On Jul 22, 2020, at 10:19 PM, Pete Resnick = wrote: >=20 > On 22 Jul 2020, at 16:31, Bob Hinden wrote: >=20 >> To Pete=E2=80=99s email, where should this work take place? >=20 > See my other response, but this is part of the question the WG is = meant to answer. Do we think we need a WG or BOF to work on this? Then = we're probably going to suggest discussing on a new mailing list. If we = think this belongs somewhere else, e.g., I could imagine that we decide = that it should be part of the RFC Editor's responsibility, then we could = ask the IETF Chair or LLC to take up the work. But we've got a whole = menu of options. In addition to the ideas I=E2=80=99ve seen discussed on the list thus = far (in the draft, updates to the RFC Style Guide, changes to the idnits = tool), I=E2=80=99ve been wondering whether writing up some guidance for = Gen-ART reviewers could also be part of the mix here. This could have a = simple focus on checking for clear, descriptive metaphors, or it could = be more detailed. In any event since the directorate reviews every = document before publication that might be an additional tool to = consider. I would also note that since our collective understanding of the impact = of language evolves over time, it might be useful to think about the = line between what might get memorialized in an RFC (say, a broader = statement of policy or principle that doesn=E2=80=99t change often) = versus what might get documented in a form that could be more detailed = and easier to update like the I-D checklist [1] (which is fairly out of = date but technically easier to update than an RFC) or an IESG statement. Alissa [1] https://www.ietf.org/standards/ids/guidelines/ > I'm happy to start talking about that now in addition to at our = meeting next week. >=20 > pr > --=20 > Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ > All connections to the world are tenuous at best >=20 > --=20 > Gendispatch mailing list > Gendispatch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch From nobody Thu Jul 23 12:57:57 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CD183A0D20 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 12:57:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.897 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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 KLm-md9RXpgp for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 12:57:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from episteme.net (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 538DD3A0D1C for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 12:57:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBF3DB5AF615; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 14:57:45 -0500 (CDT) Received: from episteme.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (episteme.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RX9FCHGvm8om; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 14:57:42 -0500 (CDT) Received: from [172.16.1.9] (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 026E2B5AF604; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 14:57:41 -0500 (CDT) From: "Pete Resnick" To: "Dan Harkins" Cc: gendispatch@ietf.org Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 14:57:23 -0500 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5699) Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <6ce5efeb-c1d7-3c2e-17c7-432c3a5f66f8@lounge.org> References: <20200722163704.8ADB21D61A46@ary.qy> <6ce5efeb-c1d7-3c2e-17c7-432c3a5f66f8@lounge.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed; markup=markdown Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-02 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 19:57:55 -0000 On 23 Jul 2020, at 11:09, Dan Harkins wrote: >   Hi Pete, > > On 7/22/20 7:19 PM, Pete Resnick wrote: >> On 22 Jul 2020, at 16:31, Bob Hinden wrote: >> >>> To Pete’s email, where should this work take place? >> >> See my other response, but this is part of the question the WG is >> meant to answer. Do we think we need a WG or BOF to work on this? >> Then we're probably going to suggest discussing on a new mailing >> list. If we think this belongs somewhere else, e.g., I could imagine >> that we decide that it should be part of the RFC Editor's >> responsibility, then we could ask the IETF Chair or LLC to take up >> the work. But we've got a whole menu of options. I'm happy to start >> talking about that now in addition to at our meeting next week. > >   Well I hope one of the choices on the menu is rejection of the new > work. Absolutely, and perfectly fine to discuss such a possibility here on the list in addition to at the session next week. >   In its current form I think the draft should be rejected. That's sort of a multipart answer to the question, and I think you get at this elsewhere in your message: If the authors somehow insisted that the current approach to the draft is the one and only way they're willing to work on it, rejecting it would be perfectly appropriate. But most authors are more reasonable than that (and I take Niels and Mallory to be pretty reasonable), so the better way to construct that answer is, "With changes A, B and C, I would deploy it to X, with changes 1, 2, and 3, I might deploy it to Y, and I think it would be most useful if we aimed toward changes A, B, and C". Of course, you might also say, "I don't think anything like this is worth doing at all, even with changing the form of the document, so we should just reject it." Make it clear to folks which direction you are leaning. >   So I guess from my perspective it depends on what the authors want. > Do they want > to establish the word police to hunt out bad think (and bad thinkers!) > or do they > just want clearer and more descriptive metaphors used in RFCs? Those are, of course, not the only two choices. It might be reasonable to propose a document to remind people that some metaphors can be obnoxious, even if they are meant innocuously or humorously, and that people should keep an eye out for that possibility, without making the document contain a list of "bad words" to be avoided. You may or may not be on board with such a document, but best not to artificially set the list of choices with straw men. pr -- Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ All connections to the world are tenuous at best From nobody Thu Jul 23 16:55:12 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 908B03A0940 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 16:55:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.12 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.12 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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lowentropy.net header.b=ZMYId9Dg; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=lWHW3K+v 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 EC2kG_H6FNiT for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 16:55:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70D963A093D for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 16:55:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89C875C0139 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 19:55:08 -0400 (EDT) Received: from imap2 ([10.202.2.52]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 23 Jul 2020 19:55:08 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lowentropy.net; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to:references:date:from:to :subject:content-type; s=fm2; bh=pZYaJo2pYq2OD1JAeQLuYw9wWud6mOd g9KDJcjVFzMc=; b=ZMYId9DgX9ET3wlWm65DAGtXMAhad0/pAEA/U77BzGoGkSj f2nZ2/JnD62bR9J+Iz6DtmrqzGDxUn0q0oj7f/Kizquap6CEa7xQ5fEWmYeV3+sn LgW+7cSHcx1TQ7QkOquSdmK1/FEZE+uVPkzJFpvasJwP7rXX0VDOSQjbzMzsaQlB Pio4s1AjPfigMsmCerbI/qFIwtNdN8Gco6N6FyaVDnsxycxnVXcnAbmtRK4Q+YDw D/IQEJnxHoMpU7+xmueRLAFJCKOsI/lCWfcwHwqtXPC408Ymr1NpToogIYUEEopl iXgIMZ5ju7s3bCcKUxyi3QYPeXTBqZyyqwq/C5w== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=pZYaJo 2pYq2OD1JAeQLuYw9wWud6mOdg9KDJcjVFzMc=; b=lWHW3K+v8u2Xu/a7jUXyxk jMmdnwUuPyUufffXnrEdP09w+Xyr7v6J17KU1BO8Udz+fMWpYJxAcAEQ38VLKbU+ GALvjUDcc2pkJW8cG/UXboXkS+Pv4agyZg7Avl5HFKIZNRQvWaSELkhc5WdBKE7V vb5yirE/7UHQpYkGJwpGrD4WBJiyKP7E1GNkbGwDsLtbtPKs1cEEnnfyayslVbDh 4HskUTLNgPoGj1tzSnAThYZ38bgz8Zl5LtzuSJ1BR8oAHLJveDB2CJQ5mm6OW7k8 51hCpRPlJ13KO0D+OE2RR7MxopBBLLa/YUBUTPaTCL19GcLK9w5QmDpHertSy/Rw == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduiedrhedvgddvhecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepofgfggfkjghffffhvffutgesthdtre dtreerjeenucfhrhhomhepfdforghrthhinhcuvfhhohhmshhonhdfuceomhhtsehlohif vghnthhrohhphidrnhgvtheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepheefteduudduhedtkefhvd fhteelffdujeegjeffheffveekudeigfeuveekfeelnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgep tdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepmhhtsehlohifvghnthhrohhphidrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 06C66E00C9; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 19:55:08 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.3.0-92-g11c785d-fm-20200721.004-g11c785d5 Mime-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <13414.1595524814@localhost> References: <031601d65fb0$f6aa0a30$e3fe1e90$@olddog.co.uk> <22930.1595383098@localhost> <036b01d66003$b2cc4c30$1864e490$@olddog.co.uk> <64b85c4a-dd2f-ed84-27f8-fbe77aa05b02@gont.com.ar> <13414.1595524814@localhost> Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 09:54:48 +1000 From: "Martin Thomson" To: gendispatch@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] =?utf-8?q?Thoughts_on_draft-carpenter-gendispatch-?= =?utf-8?q?draft-adoption?= X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2020 23:55:11 -0000 On Fri, Jul 24, 2020, at 03:20, Michael Richardson wrote: > Chairs *ARE* allowed to do this according to the current guidelines. ... > It's something that I want to preserve. Could you say a little more about why? For me, chairs have significant, but indirect, power over what is adopted. Why allow specific, direct power? As Joel says, adoption is a strong statement that has an established meaning. For me, going directly against that requires similarly strong justification, precedent or no. From nobody Thu Jul 23 20:57:35 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DB0A3A0A6E for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 20:57:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 f0gI7uNSvPnT for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 20:57:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pl1-x633.google.com (mail-pl1-x633.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::633]) (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 714533A0A6C for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 20:57:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x633.google.com with SMTP id l6so3766282plt.7 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 20:57:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Dj2kglEVmls1Fl5FD5bAPAC503R2Z4Th9rdS2Xf29+U=; b=W/FtdYFpJGCK9wLgPJQL2asLyenx26Mib9km9HcPbBLieaFGUZ1LYs0W/uTrFpgyBK mZHoKepx0D3FP4qmZk+V2rYsOvfvZm5lwQZTbBoLKPzbczryarrKIqqCxNtYXWUr556S aMwipc+KZZvdcvcDBx15UoMhA0Gbox6Bl15wylg5b6CfeWQMmjTDRxle/BZhncjUn1/X zYmIo+uOUm8vYsnT+Mwt84Mlzycm7/XmeW25egTiGQzW3S+zGwTpx3cr/d9K8wsuwNnd lNiXD80pSlISNYjVWc/s84D0yvkwtgVwAHaPPyaEaxBWGD7ELse64UwRkh9B5anMsuiz gygA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Dj2kglEVmls1Fl5FD5bAPAC503R2Z4Th9rdS2Xf29+U=; b=TDB61YGoadsTtcEBHL664SdzONz2qorEmTdNbrbATpb+dODyZhIXhbv3Zqqjwhetxc X4w1eMwITE7+lxttlS2m7W2JCPvKsZWEJn6jOlRa5BuOfU32JdGsj9dZqb4VJ8Rh1w9E oZvBe3lw6c2h/WjkUEmscxMHlvFEmfMMGLQhnIATmOQ5DxD8Aze8DUi577Zep/JdfNxL IaWKQWh0pPU2nYbfwuxg+DzYrF1489dDHHKyUOwOvQS2vfIfZotvnkLXizhpMSPryIBS alYb+PhAx3CjFvcVvHBXpc6l4jKDZEfrbYsC6Q1/ND1wIfsgwj6GupKbuCDpa0llq+B0 hXlA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533YUQkOLNCC+OtThF3LovK0HX2rgBzrkEfqglmvBnDvSSdDy0VC dRQRiJMRqWEM4wE5zU/DafDhS/Gm X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwSSafxf9EYHvnnkFmIF0frJ0ESqPOEUGpvUzjb0kvyZE5gp9V+9neL98dXSBjZMKbFyfTKyA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:b7c8:: with SMTP id v8mr6520184plz.201.1595563051651; Thu, 23 Jul 2020 20:57:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.20] ([151.210.139.192]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m17sm4671417pfo.182.2020.07.23.20.57.29 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 23 Jul 2020 20:57:30 -0700 (PDT) To: Alissa Cooper , Pete Resnick Cc: gendispatch@ietf.org References: <20200722163704.8ADB21D61A46@ary.qy> From: Brian E Carpenter Message-ID: <46f62d5f-ab7a-9f8c-53d3-d68b8e2dc319@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 15:57:26 +1200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] draft-knodel-terminology-02 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 03:57:34 -0000 > I=E2=80=99ve been wondering whether writing up some guidance for Gen-AR= T reviewers could also be part of the mix here. This could have a simple = focus on checking for clear, descriptive metaphors, or it could be more d= etailed. In any event since the directorate reviews every document before= publication that might be an additional tool to consider. Being a Gen-ART reviewer, I found myself wondering how much extra work th= at would be. Probably not much, in reality. But just for fun I did a quic= k analysis of one of my folders that contains about 570 drafts. There are roughly 87 instances of "master", 37 instances of "slave", and = about 88 instances of the string "black"**. The latter occurs at least 21= times as part of "blacklist"|"black list"|"black-list", and at least 39 = times as part of "blackhole"|"black hole"|"black-hole". ** after removing names of people and ignoring draft-knodel itself. Regards Brian Carpenter On 24-Jul-20 07:00, Alissa Cooper wrote: >=20 >> On Jul 22, 2020, at 10:19 PM, Pete Resnick wrot= e: >> >> On 22 Jul 2020, at 16:31, Bob Hinden wrote: >> >>> To Pete=E2=80=99s email, where should this work take place? >> >> See my other response, but this is part of the question the WG is mean= t to answer. Do we think we need a WG or BOF to work on this? Then we're = probably going to suggest discussing on a new mailing list. If we think t= his belongs somewhere else, e.g., I could imagine that we decide that it = should be part of the RFC Editor's responsibility, then we could ask the = IETF Chair or LLC to take up the work. But we've got a whole menu of opti= ons. >=20 > In addition to the ideas I=E2=80=99ve seen discussed on the list thus f= ar (in the draft, updates to the RFC Style Guide, changes to the idnits t= ool), I=E2=80=99ve been wondering whether writing up some guidance for Ge= n-ART reviewers could also be part of the mix here. This could have a sim= ple focus on checking for clear, descriptive metaphors, or it could be mo= re detailed. In any event since the directorate reviews every document be= fore publication that might be an additional tool to consider. >=20 > I would also note that since our collective understanding of the impact= of language evolves over time, it might be useful to think about the lin= e between what might get memorialized in an RFC (say, a broader statement= of policy or principle that doesn=E2=80=99t change often) versus what mi= ght get documented in a form that could be more detailed and easier to up= date like the I-D checklist [1] (which is fairly out of date but technica= lly easier to update than an RFC) or an IESG statement. >=20 > Alissa >=20 > [1] https://www.ietf.org/standards/ids/guidelines/ >=20 >=20 >> I'm happy to start talking about that now in addition to at our meetin= g next week. >> >> pr >> --=20 >> Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ >> All connections to the world are tenuous at best >> >> --=20 >> Gendispatch mailing list >> Gendispatch@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch >=20 From nobody Sun Jul 26 02:35:38 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F9ED3A0CFE; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 02:35:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.102 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.102 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.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 Yz6a57_E-f7t; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 02:35:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from EUR02-HE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr10084.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.1.84]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E5233A0CFC; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 02:35:33 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=JdeU4etYQRNbXFIh01YGZFJhxTp0Siv6LdOi0SPg+gu4ywwBIAdx6Y8MipIF0ABCCj8IWEToP0177tlpWCVBrd2EAzmbKz2H7ULfytz1SKYvU+hCQIGVB7k8FJbjwSWg0B8V13EcBwGCg3r11q8zfdEiYqBx71jC5lRkjbWidxu8TZYiNrEILPD9rn+yh2CYvFDSx3qO3acOANpixHaTrXu6fMcEBsrxzvCBF/SwxeVZcbcMtj+v0hs6y05JvOBaZer62UkoVD+jeCjpKCXfLl6qL/yhL7DhB0nSvI3fHcc9E+d6QoDwymsRQ6JX2P3c3Fk/Fv/NcuoKOV8VPcAm1w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=kAuiHAwTOZj6IveFD5SHODQKZ0xJbSmH+GSeiqXKFng=; b=V3Udbm//Wl/utkDS57U23r0IJ/9OngwBulsbM2zH9OwOrU3kfiCwRK6LjpDmVv7O1fXEoUWgkrQtNrHN/G+6MKyrmO0XkWQdZkM2dEjgqWSznzgs4i1JuvnFpUb6P3UoIjkljqhySkOSz5wuz/q6N02fqVgzqV0oiR6qPhLwhhyLNczWEf8qsO6mX5FiraBnb7XzLnMwjFVh9m2Zm0Xc76kk2ii0K1fvA4c2xVjfMLVNFyWOi8ifcnU/Cm8I0Cfbi6CBa70usGLQNuFnflMVDWrsOsHVyoUqD5vh4JLveUHuvFEr6wY5qiITUbPVIdipystzw2adnJfrySoOLcrH7w== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ericsson.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ericsson.com; dkim=pass header.d=ericsson.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ericsson.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=kAuiHAwTOZj6IveFD5SHODQKZ0xJbSmH+GSeiqXKFng=; b=mE8ITET2pDEnqT8dtc1HacZfNe42f06GLJnBnr+c6HFTrhjExsNqatUp07TouGp5NuXDNCFa27t6i3dOXLxjUsGacEMHduk/FId6nR4fRY0WaSDnho1x3lb8eAZzrTxGfIjoSwO8t8ZH1GDC4IPefl6Lhl4i8IfWzdND9/BDclA= Received: from HE1PR0702MB3818.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:8c::18) by HE1PR07MB4153.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:9d::20) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3239.11; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 09:35:30 +0000 Received: from HE1PR0702MB3818.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::a1fa:7949:3b5:b72f]) by HE1PR0702MB3818.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::a1fa:7949:3b5:b72f%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3239.013; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 09:35:30 +0000 From: Francesca Palombini To: "gendispatch@ietf.org" CC: "gendispatch-chairs@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Looking for minute takers and jabber scribe Thread-Index: AQHWYzAaYYEwquANKk2N0YUxT71BiA== Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2020 09:35:30 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-GB X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.37.20051002 authentication-results: ietf.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;ietf.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=ericsson.com; x-originating-ip: [79.12.182.121] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 952d8ec9-9d2e-4589-bd31-08d831473cce x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: HE1PR07MB4153: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:7219; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 59Enw3ZPiKiwRTMOt7L5I6nYVaViNP9OPmIaXrqMIZmv/RXl/OeVxnPku8v8LYiNzao/yT7CMEm0budwsWf4r5RI7Sy602V9ig6L2047lwZLkI7QM7QSFiBGPj1gjSKBzCefTBnjrUzy4TfN44/ki15h6wtbiTxG5G8hyp5Yp+phECQHl8UIzYIseed810MOpIe7ylieZ9RmXHgHI7+PipcVYMzi4PISH8nHGLAFxKpfgZh4BIRj/xSvMvXJtrVlEFtPP0dgU7kLAw7InmOqQ2bOkfzyv1/LO3v/VuFJ+rvyNenJOTDt6ujzdI95aI45 x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:HE1PR0702MB3818.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:(4636009)(396003)(136003)(346002)(39860400002)(376002)(366004)(66446008)(316002)(86362001)(66556008)(64756008)(6512007)(44832011)(2616005)(33656002)(66476007)(36756003)(5660300002)(8936002)(4326008)(26005)(6916009)(71200400001)(4744005)(2906002)(8676002)(76116006)(66946007)(478600001)(6506007)(450100002)(6486002)(91956017)(186003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: FtbLzJbt6g6hzSu6C3NpciHNGhzgaKqz+xVe3l+3EWdqHMaYqf4Xr+1Rg5fjJKrxZDN6jDaAan3MiWxg8MGYsnCLyZlX7i/CTMdqKqCuda0rsR+qUSc37Bh0+bH4TSOWiM/C0/Qa3z53jy6fnMH3V5k23pRNdqUsBGy/Po07GnqHsxxHpOzCaMrdzdds1foFPpE75Q9PNzLBy/WVc3eE7MCC3sw3qHRqATjge12p9ert//94cBVy9pjoRDqFLt3dgQnn205kqTwE+dLxbV1GbMlQA09V8kMFYhlda4DqxA+l9rUoYmY4LtIdW9ZX455PFxE8T9ahCYLAxUscGrCKwMfPBxoHv5FsrJFphcKkiOQ7Dhppc4JTiqnC1QC1aGONiETIPaBXX48wpMhkcvViYiX7Bx64YAB7ptS0aX3ONj3njT7525G5WoQCWaLQacSG5Obs+rE/kS82uV+/xWOq45f+d40TlaeOJ7m5V+VwuzrXW/OwHBStPhNSTULYfumxWan+nmGyVexKeq+cEd80YefhVZbtRSe6D3Z47N1FTnMXlLFOexI4vipOPznnHHNmUw+MESSoK1C8DTCTCHiox4Y3pSScgPsIw7B+G+WgQB1fUHZ39rjvw/ZA6snsKNbQXKS+yKbeeLO09hQSdR5cEg== x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: HE1PR0702MB3818.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 952d8ec9-9d2e-4589-bd31-08d831473cce X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 26 Jul 2020 09:35:30.3856 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: QaOwMt7UgG0Neq/TfBePfjgIkQaO/hAzo83hIKvMoYtVyf+hVJBgy7dOozGXd39LWQnzvN9bmWbpbi2nOMvMKLi1ZTuAwD9L7GMfN7FoJGIVJIFmYjO5dRcmWnqieRD5 X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HE1PR07MB4153 Archived-At: Subject: [Gendispatch] Looking for minute takers and jabber scribe X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2020 09:35:36 -0000 SGksDQoNCldlIGFyZSBzdGlsbCBsb29raW5nIGZvciB2b2x1bnRlZXJzIGZvciBqYWJiZXIgc2Ny aWJlIGFuZCBtaW51dGUgdGFrZXJzIGZvciBvdXIgc2Vzc2lvbiBvbiBUaHVyc2RheSwgSnVseSAz MCAyMDIwLCAxMzowMC0xMzo1MCBVVEMuIA0KDQpGb3IgdGhlIGphYmJlciBzY3JpYmUgcm9sZSwg c2luY2UgZnJvbSBleHBlcmllbmNlIHdlIGhhdmUgc2VlbiBpbiBwcmV2aW91cyB2aXJ0dWFsIG1l ZXRpbmdzIHN1YnN0YW50aXZlIGNvbnZlcnNhdGlvbnMgaW4gdGhlIGphYmJlciByb29tL01lZXRl Y2hvIGNoYXQsIHdl4oCZZCBsaWtlIHRoZSBqYWJiZXIgc2NyaWJlIHRvIGNvbnNpZGVyIHdoZXRo ZXIgdGhvc2UgY29udmVyc2F0aW9ucyBzaG91bGQgY29tZSB0byB0aGUgYXVkaW8gY2hhbm5lbCwg YW5kIGVpdGhlciBicmluZyB0aGVtIG9yIGVuY291cmFnZSBvdGhlciBqYWJiZXIgcGFydGljaXBh bnRzIHRvIGRvIHNvLg0KDQpNYW55IHRoYW5rcyBpbiBhZHZhbmNlIHRvIGFueWJvZHkgd2hvIHdp bGwgc3RlcCB1cCENCkZyYW5jZXNjYQ0KDQo= From nobody Thu Jul 30 10:34:57 2020 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 801433A0D27; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 10:34:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.102 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.102 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ericsson.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 D18VY1rCcSWy; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 10:34:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from EUR03-AM5-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-eopbgr30045.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.3.45]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E3823A1022; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 10:34:38 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=WbWUpia9aUiCk2ycS20IQcZCIa6AuUVc7aG8EzpVIIXS65ecMo3JsPwLT6DRH9QnOO6Llilp2Q4vKglbiU5CYcZiuhStIIEhSAT6y0Qb9biay09ZQXKx+JEe34JkJKZmS5n6DP3XmuuZrWn1gHrMyCEdn1RgXM7lA9HhxVayTY4HsYuHfnSebnsxNQA5pNfm7fVZh5tE8HeLUr/5d3cLQCgCVKD3IEmTBWKVj8a3unB7SyZ22DZ7Qsra8AwhQzNSy81vFCnSlXfrxtw92AwXMCSCkdgXHfzVN5YQw9Ooc+QfdRmQddsQT3qvk89foV1gYzAvyOMoDIguZ2ZFOadP2g== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=F7aCv5HTIjxUm22ESu1088sy5fsPVJRMj/K2cHquBIY=; b=m/uAshvG00PLL2ReIPDamGaKyQjqt+x/a4KPeVzuJmgaZ9r2lpBAu4vzFJ+lhAbfgQpVcp7TL2xOiPEdA5lwdkeCM5tie+QT9tOzBQtE2//LXDdi3rVGAHINntKkRrxYrNViFS8u5ydiAl+iVElqFqm1QklBbfnWFsM1v9mYBuzjfNv4/RnwIrlePO3AtqX4vn8KMHzoFGRIC9Kv3YcRGg6HbB5r15zjFXW+cGpiSvv7A+lMLuv6MgOueEC0qTLKW+lA0/VQdHkIupZ+athEQLmuomNBrP+7fJ+eaqg2rV0jcgTqCNkpcW1eNCINlAzNO1zVyBQC02HWnR1KdOnQrg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ericsson.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=ericsson.com; dkim=pass header.d=ericsson.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ericsson.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=F7aCv5HTIjxUm22ESu1088sy5fsPVJRMj/K2cHquBIY=; b=pCiuvPTiyXnBvkUCdGeStTYN4SMRRYXJ36bCRH9ya9RVQ/ZuioUfVp0HjGiEMR/XSS7RxpRzrXJIh0aEc21Urh+l9N4Iq6o0K2odC4RyEOVEu563eCO6t7AcGsm+JtIXngYrfMrmD7GsbEs7dKersqKRvmycaohqNDIc7vv+rhU= Received: from HE1PR0702MB3818.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:8c::18) by HE1PR07MB3147.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:7:39::16) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.3239.12; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 17:34:35 +0000 Received: from HE1PR0702MB3818.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::a1fa:7949:3b5:b72f]) by HE1PR0702MB3818.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::a1fa:7949:3b5:b72f%7]) with mapi id 15.20.3239.017; Thu, 30 Jul 2020 17:34:35 +0000 From: Francesca Palombini To: "gendispatch@ietf.org" CC: "gendispatch-chairs@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: Minutes IETF 108 Thread-Index: AQHWZpex5gcPq7oE6UqGcyTgOa6seg== Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 17:34:35 +0000 Message-ID: Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US Content-Language: en-GB X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.39.20071300 authentication-results: ietf.org; dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;ietf.org; dmarc=none action=none header.from=ericsson.com; x-originating-ip: [79.12.182.121] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: d07a5f0d-1804-4cd0-fb57-08d834aed3c6 x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: HE1PR07MB3147: x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:9508; x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: ozhM26TClTDNnDzKRd+Pk76ZEp8bNc1oYc1zf0UCGdnM+mr3m8/1aZj2wbHfbuommErROlvU+n1SpPwvE/VoKnX9RPhnojhG7VgLBEsadzlNlmcX0RF3aaxXhw9Ex96w0tXR9hF51C7qhhPo7qgoL/Ij9bceOZ2oNBFjAKZlySOgdfv5JGrQo107/i+yzqIv3FAot5dvzFdfgED8ayK4Ohgl8d+GwDR51o7SyZVapQCTjuTrZ9xXVqA7wnJ2+g+OpAD0H2FkdSNBKwBJCUn8Go7d40g/AvNKrhXO+YjI8VfMZrh+x/T1XJNJEUsKWUXHnqkWNbi2D/f/V0GCFodXeYv3itMbWjiDV4Kr6pmnAyfWcVcnVYXMHW0e/n1Vbe6m/pGI418AOEXaDTVilNPxBA== x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:HE1PR0702MB3818.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFTY:; SFS:(4636009)(136003)(396003)(346002)(366004)(39860400002)(376002)(6916009)(6486002)(6506007)(2906002)(26005)(6512007)(186003)(7116003)(33656002)(8676002)(4326008)(66476007)(8936002)(66446008)(36756003)(66946007)(450100002)(86362001)(316002)(91956017)(76116006)(64756008)(966005)(66556008)(5660300002)(44832011)(2616005)(478600001)(4744005)(71200400001); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata: 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 x-ms-exchange-transport-forked: True Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: HE1PR0702MB3818.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: d07a5f0d-1804-4cd0-fb57-08d834aed3c6 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 30 Jul 2020 17:34:35.3782 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: YO9fzeW6wdWtL1FjFyg/Fm6alJq7GnasxDiPSWyLAr+nA6DVYcJwsu4sJZTqPMm7o0QL/6qyN/oH8SDWCRnQTTDYOAHQZab0dOOHdm7b+OshFGk8BQrOdri/u5XeU+Rl X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: HE1PR07MB3147 Archived-At: Subject: [Gendispatch] Minutes IETF 108 X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 17:34:57 -0000 SGkgYWxsLA0KDQpUaGFuayB5b3UgZm9yIHRoZSBtZWV0aW5nIHRvZGF5LiBTcGVjaWFsIHRoYW5r cyB0byBvdXIgZmFidWxvdXMgbWludXRlIHRha2VycyBCcm9uIEdvbmR3YW5hLCBBZHJpYW4gRmFy cmVsbCBhbmQgRGFuIFlvcmshDQoNCkRyYWZ0IG1pbnV0ZXMgaGF2ZSBiZWVuIHBvc3RlZDogaHR0 cHM6Ly93d3cuaWV0Zi5vcmcvcHJvY2VlZGluZ3MvMTA4L21pbnV0ZXMvbWludXRlcy0xMDgtZ2Vu ZGlzcGF0Y2gtMDEgUGxlYXNlIGNoZWNrIHRoYXQgeW91ciBjb21tZW50cyBoYXZlIGJlZW4gY2Fw dHVyZWQgY29ycmVjdGx5LCBhbmQgaWYgbm90IGNvbnRhY3QgeW91ciBjaGFpcnMuIFJlY29yZGlu Z3Mgd2lsbCBiZSBhZGRlZCB0byB0aGVtIHdoZW4gbWFkZSBhdmFpbGFibGUuDQoNClRoYW5rcywN CkZyYW5jZXNjYQ0KDQo=