From nobody Fri Aug 1 00:51:53 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF4651A044F for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 00:51:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham 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 rUMJTQxFfNpr for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 00:51:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (asmtp3.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.159]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 851681A0380 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 00:51:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp3.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s717pTn6019346; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 08:51:29 +0100 Received: from 950129200 (smb-rsycl-07.hotspot.hub-one.net [213.174.98.18]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp3.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s717pRnI019277 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 1 Aug 2014 08:51:29 +0100 From: "Adrian Farrel" To: "'S Moonesamy'" , "'Abdussalam Baryun'" References: <080401cfa981$e3ea1d40$abbe57c0$@olddog.co.uk> <6.2.5.6.2.20140731063247.0cd528e0@elandnews.com> In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20140731063247.0cd528e0@elandnews.com> Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 08:51:32 +0100 Message-ID: <00f201cfad5d$6a4cb710$3ee62530$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQMmEalehxWr8hX67W96e3bx+GsWwAF5j9w6AdPZX8YCSPnsO5jh3Ang Content-Language: en-gb X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1576-7.5.0.1018-20852.005 X-TM-AS-Result: No--11.332-10.0-31-10 X-imss-scan-details: No--11.332-10.0-31-10 X-TMASE-MatchedRID: 6otD/cJAac04HKI/yaqRm0hEDfw/93BuShVPkKm2lvr5MObjZcfR6+Zz V+HJxY3Cq8BEX4p1M5yaBp6Ea2HyHVaZNkpZwlmWq1ZJZ2z+SbbRahuPwaQ1Wu4qU/92plPQlH6 REwfgTaODKydm0O6U3jxLBr8jUimwGTvDgN8UHcOepOo7UqIl+ZSqFuRkxcUn7W5PiIx6aZqU62 zvc1Dlo/qfX7Q3VTc/WnH55eVWu0dY41mdgnf/T1u4M/xm4KZeBdebOqawiLuTMTaQzhvoek9Ya VfuuGm8ZkLhmTuGQ/V4WbZQb8ckkllT1+MC6aFY5gCHftmwEMLjAcZeNJgY95soi2XrUn/JyeMt MD9QOgDGlDvsLUDW2o6HM5rqDwqtPIZZGVQKDBXvRMTBRqkZgB7fyciDIW+L7cIZ7z1CS3b/HPf XZtk7Ow== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/S0bYPpcJp7225fA8AqORjay5LNQ Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Ignored by WG chairs or WG editors X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2014 07:51:52 -0000 > >There are real cases, that is why I discussed this, just I think the > >reason is because of lack of diversity consideration within such > >responsibilities. The cases were in WGs in different dates and > >drafts: MANET, OSPF, 6Lo, I2RS, I don't go into details because I > >want to solve not damage relationships, we can do that privately if > >IETF wants more. > > It will unfortunately damage relationships. SM is right. It will most certainly damage relationships. You cannot go around making statements in public forums that specific chairs have acted improperly by allowing unspecified things to happen. This is a significant slur on their characters. Furthermore, it is impossible to enter into a debate on this point with you because, while you say that there are real cases and while you attribute them to lack of diversity considerations, you do not explain yourself. If I am able to look at a specific case, I will be able to explain to you why and how a decision was made, or I will be able to express my concerns to the chairs involved and use this as a way to train them. Otherwise I can only use my judgement about how things tend to progress on mailing lists. What I sometimes see is that unsubstantiated statements of opinion ("I do not support this draft being adopted") are treated as votes and so nearly completely ignored -- a chair with unlimited time might respond "Please tell us your reasons," but usually the original poll stated something like "If you do not support, please give your reasons," so not following up is understandable. What I also see is that reasons that are irrelevant are either refuted or ignored: I would prefer that they were refuted ("The reason you give is not relevant to the process of adoption, but I hope we can work on the issue as the draft progresses"), but I understand how this may create the impression that the person giving the reason has been ignored. Now (and I find this to be a very important point), the assertion that this is a diversity issue worries me a lot. You appear to be saying that there is a prevalence of cases where the person who is ignored comes in some sense from a specific community. Furthermore, you are implying either that they are being ignored consciously or unconsciously) because they come from that community, or that by ignoring the person we are neglecting the opinions of that community. Either of these points would be very worrying, so (again) I call on you to substantiate your assertion so that we can properly investigate and rectify any issues. Thanks, Adrian From nobody Fri Aug 1 02:59:53 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B4161A0648 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 02:59:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 kys6mlobp8Ro for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 02:59:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yh0-x22f.google.com (mail-yh0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::22f]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D96481A0646 for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 02:59:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yh0-f47.google.com with SMTP id f10so2410660yha.6 for ; Fri, 01 Aug 2014 02:59:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=66J9u4qYhFn2Uf6q1R5WXPnemS3AdUOIbGselyfFc+Y=; b=qiQPWvFX4wAMzpzqHrP+m13N0NUhYPmCSdCfPtHpNZJ/1V36AS+5UhgiOI3vldjekx TU73gAMtFXTTv1FjYRD7g9xtu3sEM6n+h1V2JBh2jSXkj8Z/qJeM6NSOVKR3XITSPV1s SzLRbswTez5bC1i+pKSYK2x6tDtoCakfRw7nDjqeN0JelS/A2LS+6NpySg98htisXp1k NelmpeMW5JfJqqugyD/5PzoWu0seTrLlhx8zEqnckXSYKMbgGT1Fo6sUdi97GwJKHPB9 DkICWYR5rgf0LNeOqQHbTp9PrwXA7OnHXXEtud7xAeaqZTW8YhUuPCqApcDRLFMDO2QK JCFw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.10.66 with SMTP id 42mr6631326yhu.68.1406887186992; Fri, 01 Aug 2014 02:59:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.44.216 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 02:59:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1C8B79BE-623E-4DE2-9507-DB9D0511E900@gmail.com> References: <080401cfa981$e3ea1d40$abbe57c0$@olddog.co.uk> <6.2.5.6.2.20140731063247.0cd528e0@elandnews.com> <1C8B79BE-623E-4DE2-9507-DB9D0511E900@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2014 11:59:46 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: Kathleen Moriarty Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1136b28c0515cc04ff8e732c Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/E2tOK-ptlkJWXDYcjL6L9hj5cdM Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , S Moonesamy Subject: Re: [Diversity] Ignored by WG chairs or WG editors X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2014 09:59:52 -0000 --001a1136b28c0515cc04ff8e732c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi Kathleen and Moonesamy, My first message was to help bring an remote observation here on the list and discuss the way to avoid it happening in the IETF future I don't care about the past, so it was never about complaining. I think it was more important to discuss how to stop/block ignorance to happen (did IETF solve the blocking?) than to question did the observation happen and/or starting argue what was details/reasons on all parties then second thinking how to solve. However, my replies has to answer to others, On Thursday, July 31, 2014, Kathleen Moriarty wrote: > Hello, > > Sent from my iPhone > > > On Jul 31, 2014, at 11:21 AM, S Moonesamy > wrote: > > > > Hi Abdussalam, > > At 01:40 31-07-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: > >> On this list I hope we have some diversity rules/principles, as for me > I try to forget if you are male or female, and really does not matter on > the list and will never help only if the subject is gender to help related > discussion. The reason of my first discussion that in one WG I did not see > consensus clear on list related to one draft which was adopted. > > > > Thanks for explaining the above. RFC 7221 discusses about the handling > of Internet-Drafts by working groups. > > > > In theory, anyone can raise an objection if, for example, the Working > Group Chair says that there is consensus when there isn't. In practice, > there are only a few persons who will do that. > > I'd also like to understand if there was a poll conducted in a meeting > that was then followed by the poll on list that you mention. If that's the > case, consensus may have been clear and then was followed up on list to > allow others who did not attend to participate. This could make the poll > in email appear much different than the full poll that could have had many > people participating. They would not have responded on list as they > already provided a response (hum, hand in air, etc.). You should be able > to verify this in meeting minutes or through the recording in the worst > case scenario. It some time does not happen to get consensus on the list only at meetings, but usually no objection or complaints from community. If chairs are busy may be community are busy as well, but IETF should be busy to its business and future. IETF should have blocking of undesirable situations in lists or in meetings. > > > > >> comment and discussing below, (I discuss with you as diversity list > participants, and without considering your background of > relationships/position/power/experience/gender/religion/culture/etc.), > > > > Ok. > > > >> Yes, we may need a draft authored by diversified team including all who > were ignored in IETF, to describe reasons/issues and possible > solutions/recommendations. > > > > It is not possible to do that if nobody volunteers to write the draft > and nobody comes forward and say that they have been ignored. Yes, so now we are starting discussing it and documenting the observation and discussion on this list then some one will get interested to write or present to the IETF meetings. > > > >> There are real cases, that is why I discussed this, just I think the > reason is because of lack of diversity consideration within such > responsibilities. The cases were in WGs in different dates and drafts: > MANET, OSPF, 6Lo, I2RS, I don't go into details because I want to solve not > damage relationships, we can do that privately if IETF wants more. > > > > It will unfortunately damage relationships. Therefore, the best way in this discussion to discuss how IETF avoids this claim to happen ( no need to find out reasons of failure or misunderstandings or mistakes), the most important thing did IETF make it clear to its positions not to do such reaction. Did IETF confirm that it does not allow silence in discussions/replays to community within WG? Let us solve by targeting IETF not targeting observers or managers/editors. > > > >> I am doing my part her in the list. IETF discussions and reminders are > training to all community and to who allow change in their draft/work/life. > However, IETF as organisation needs to confirm that it is not allowing > ignorance. I don't find a confirmation in its recommendations (I may be > wrong). So management/editors of IETF are free to do ignorance. > > > > The usage of the word "ignorance" in the above is incorrect. A person > who does not understand what the author of the message was trying to > express will consider it as a negative comment. If this discussion was on > the ietf@ietf.org mailing list there would be some > impolite comments. Does IETF organisation/procedures/General-Area/RFCs-related consider/understand the word or does it mention/consider such situation that is making some damage in the IETF future and that IETF considers solving. > > > I'll quote a few comments from the last plenary without mentioning the > names of the persons: > > > > "Several of us have the experience of many participants not being > willing to engage > > because of the heat of some of the participants." > > > > "I stopped reading the IETF list years ago, because I don't like being > scolded by > > people who don't have a clue. Although our official position is that > work gets > > done on mailing lists, people who don't show up to the meetings really > have great > > difficulty interacting with others. And I don't have the time to deal > with that." > > > > "It's far more important to retain [removed] on the list than to get 35 > newbies." > > > > "You have to search back through the chain of posts to find out what > the conversation > > is, and to understand whether they are talking about." > > > > "different participants are looking for different things from the > mailing list." > > > > "Being attacked from all sides, not defending yourself would be > perceived as a > > sign of weakness." > > > > There is a wide range of opinions about what the IETF community would > like to change. What am interested to know were those inputs from WG chairs or WG editors? If yes then what did IETF do to solve? If both don't care then IMHO it is bad for IETF future. > > > My take-away from that discussion was that the IETF list could continue > as-is with the group of people who like that forum and newcomers would > likely prefer alternate solutions, including social interfaces anyway. If > we wanted to make sure you could get all the information in one place, a > summary from the social site could be periodically sent to the list. > > Just a thought and a possible way forward (I'm sure there are other good > options too that will be discussed). I think a reminder at each IETF meeting is good, as to remind WGs of diversity considerations and to remind chairs and editors to reply as best as they can. So when the chair announces the reminders (they always announce note-well and forget announcing this reply issue), if there was some one had no reply she/he will be happy to say "oh I am still waiting for such reply related to blabla", the environment of discussion and meeting will make progress. > >> The second case is on both sides, for management and participants. Both > need training on diversity considerations. Both need help, and IETF needs > to be clear if it allows ignorance or not (may be IETF can name it in a > different word as silence or not-reply action). Furthermore, that learning > needs to be top-to-bottom. > > > > What are the diversity considerations? Is it about taking into > consideration: > > > > (a) relationships > > > > (b) position > > > > (c) experience > > > > (d) gender > > > > (e) religion > > > > (f) culture I think within discussions and work process we should be interacting equally to all without considering those. For example, if a chair or AD asks a question in any room/WG/list a quick respond will be received may be different if they posted with a unknown name (this test can be tried by management and for their analysis if they want to investigate IETF behavior). The organisation diversity considerations as we have in our engineering security considerations, does our protocol/procedure/RFC/positions consider/allow increase in diversity/security? > I'd say it's important to all, not just top - bottom as the IETF evolves > with annual leadership changes. What about reminders to them all, as when AD put on his hat he/she is reminded of such considerations. So the IETF top-bottom project is more about taking more attention/reaction on higher positions to consider diversity development, therefore, we can say IETF is more diversity understanding/considering. AB --001a1136b28c0515cc04ff8e732c Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Kathleen and Moonesamy,

My first message was to help = bring an remote=C2=A0observation here on the list and discuss the way to av= oid it happening in the=C2=A0IETF future I don't care about the past, s= o it was never about complaining.=C2=A0I think it was more important to dis= cuss how to stop/block=C2=A0ignorance=C2=A0to happen (did IETF solve the bl= ocking?)=C2=A0than to question did the observation happen and/or starting a= rgue=C2=A0what was details/reasons on all parties then second=C2=A0thinking= =C2=A0how to solve.=C2=A0However, my replies has to answer to others,

On Thursday, July 31, 2014, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
Hello,

Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 31, 2014, at 11:21 AM, S Moonesamy <sm+i= etf@elandsys.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Abdussalam,
> At 01:40 31-07-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
>> On this list I hope we have some diversity rules/principles, as fo= r me I try to forget if you are male or female, and really does not matter = on the list and will never help only if the subject is gender to help relat= ed discussion. The reason of my first discussion that in one WG I did not s= ee consensus clear on list related to one draft which was adopted.
>
> Thanks for explaining the above. =C2=A0RFC 7221 discusses about the ha= ndling of Internet-Drafts by working groups.
>
> In theory, anyone can raise an objection if, for example, the Working = Group Chair says that there is consensus when there isn't. =C2=A0In pra= ctice, there are only a few persons who will do that.

I'd also like to understand if there was a poll conducted in a meeting = that was then followed by the poll on list that you mention. =C2=A0If that&= #39;s the case, consensus may have been clear and then was followed up on l= ist to allow others who did not attend to participate. =C2=A0This could mak= e the poll in email appear much different than the full poll that could hav= e had many people participating. =C2=A0They would not have responded on lis= t as they already provided a response (hum, hand in air, etc.). =C2=A0You s= hould be able to verify this in meeting minutes or through the recording in= the worst case scenario.

It some time does not happen to get consensus on the li= st only at meetings,=C2=A0but usually=C2=A0no objection or complaints from = community. If chairs are busy may be community are busy as well,=C2=A0but I= ETF should be busy to its business and future. IETF should have blocking of= undesirable situations in lists or in meetings.=C2=A0
=C2=A0

>
>> comment and discussing below, (I discuss with you as diversity lis= t participants, and without considering your background of relationships/po= sition/power/experience/gender/religion/culture/etc.),
>
> Ok.
>
>> Yes, we may need a draft authored by diversified team including al= l who were ignored in IETF, to describe reasons/issues and possible solutio= ns/recommendations.
>
> It is not possible to do that if nobody volunteers to write the draft = and nobody comes forward and say that they have been ignored.
<= div>
Yes, so now we are starting discussing it and documentin= g the observation and discussion on this list then some one will get intere= sted to write or present to the IETF=C2=A0meetings.=C2=A0
=C2=A0
>
>> There are real cases, that is why I discussed this, just I think t= he reason is because of lack of diversity consideration within such respons= ibilities. =C2=A0The cases were in WGs in different dates and drafts: MANET= , OSPF, 6Lo, I2RS, I don't go into details because I want to solve not = damage relationships, we can do that privately if IETF wants more.
>
> It will unfortunately damage relationships.

Therefore, the best way in this discussion to discuss how IETF avoids= this claim to happen ( no need to find out reasons of failure or misunders= tandings or mistakes), the most important thing did IETF make it clear to i= ts positions=C2=A0not to do such reaction. Did IETF confirm that it does no= t allow silence in discussions/replays to community within WG? Let us solve= by=C2=A0targeting=C2=A0IETF not targeting observers or managers/editors.= =C2=A0=C2=A0
=C2=A0
>
>> I am doing my part her in the list. IETF discussions and reminders= are training to all community and to who allow change in their draft/work/= life. However, IETF as organisation needs to confirm that it is not allowin= g ignorance. I don't find a confirmation in its recommendations (I may = be wrong). So management/editors of IETF are free to do ignorance.
>
> The usage of the word "ignorance" in the above is incorrect.= =C2=A0A person who does not understand what the author of the message was = trying to express will consider it as a negative comment. =C2=A0If this dis= cussion was on the ietf@ietf.org mailing list there would = be some impolite comments.

Does IETF organisation/procedures/General-Area/RFCs-rel= ated consider/understand the word or does it mention/consider=C2=A0such sit= uation=C2=A0that is making some damage in the=C2=A0IETF future and that IET= F considers solving.=C2=A0

>
> I'll quote a few comments from the last plenary without mentioning= the names of the persons:
>
> =C2=A0"Several of us have the experience of many participants not= being willing to engage
> =C2=A0 because of the heat of some of the participants."
>
> =C2=A0"I stopped reading the IETF list years ago, because I don&#= 39;t like being scolded by
> =C2=A0 people who don't have a clue. =C2=A0Although our official p= osition is that work gets
> =C2=A0 done on mailing lists, people who don't show up to the meet= ings really have great
> =C2=A0 difficulty interacting with others. =C2=A0And I don't have = the time to deal with that."
>
> =C2=A0"It's far more important to retain [removed] on the lis= t than to get 35 newbies."
>
> =C2=A0"You have to search back through the chain of posts to find= out what the conversation
> =C2=A0 is, and to understand whether they are talking about."
>
> =C2=A0"different participants are looking for different things fr= om the mailing list."
>
> =C2=A0"Being attacked from all sides, not defending yourself woul= d be perceived as a
> =C2=A0 sign of weakness."
>
> There is a wide range of opinions about what the IETF community would = like to change.

What am interested to know = were those inputs from WG chairs or WG editors? If yes then what did IETF d= o to solve? If both don't care then IMHO=C2=A0it is bad for IETF future= .=C2=A0
=C2=A0
>
My take-away from that discussion was that the IETF list could continue as-= is with the group of people who like that forum and newcomers would likely = prefer alternate solutions, including social interfaces anyway. =C2=A0If we= wanted to make sure you could get all the information in one place, a summ= ary from the social site could be periodically sent to the list.

Just a thought and a possible way forward (I'm sure there are other goo= d options too that will be discussed).

I th= ink a reminder at each IETF=C2=A0meeting=C2=A0is good, as to remind WGs of = diversity considerations and to remind chairs and editors to reply as best = as they can. So when the chair announces the reminders (they always announc= e note-well and forget announcing this reply issue), if there was some one = had no reply she/he will be happy to say "oh I am still waiting for su= ch reply related to blabla", the environment of discussion and meeting= will make progress.=C2=A0


>> The second case is on both sides, for management and participants.= Both need training on diversity considerations. Both need help, and IETF n= eeds to be clear if it allows ignorance or not (may be IETF can name it in = a different word as silence or not-reply action). Furthermore, that learnin= g needs to be top-to-bottom.
>
> What are the diversity considerations? =C2=A0Is it about taking into c= onsideration:
>
> =C2=A0 (a) relationships
>
> =C2=A0 (b) position
>
> =C2=A0 (c) experience
>
> =C2=A0 (d) gender
>
> =C2=A0 (e) religion
>
> =C2=A0 (f) culture

I think within disc= ussions and work process we should be interacting equally to all without co= nsidering those. For example, if a chair or AD asks a question in any room/= WG/list a quick respond will be received may be different if they posted wi= th a unknown name (this test can be tried by management and for their analy= sis if they want to investigate IETF behavior). The organisation=C2=A0diver= sity considerations as we have in our engineering=C2=A0security considerati= ons, does our=C2=A0protocol/procedure/RFC/positions=C2=A0consider/allow=C2= =A0increase in=C2=A0diversity/security?


I'd say it's important to all, not just top - bottom as the IETF ev= olves with annual leadership changes.

What = about reminders to them all, as when AD put on his hat he/she is reminded o= f such considerations. So the IETF=C2=A0top-bottom project=C2=A0is more abo= ut taking=C2=A0more attention/reaction=C2=A0on higher positions=C2=A0to con= sider diversity development, therefore, we can say IETF is more diversity u= nderstanding/considering.=C2=A0

AB
=C2=A0
--001a1136b28c0515cc04ff8e732c-- From nobody Fri Aug 1 04:24:38 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75C1C1ABB2C for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 04:24:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.791 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.791 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=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 o0i31UfbxcCm for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 04:24:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B37C31ABB2B for ; Fri, 1 Aug 2014 04:24:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.224.157.53]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s71BOEgG009073 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 1 Aug 2014 04:24:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1406892267; x=1406978667; bh=NfIRcQaaDTk8iNOnVCofgx2v+JRXZXTmON5cBQZ8vHw=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=1T8vbhaEqt4s4Nt6hyCTZ5jt4B+2oiTfsVFQjL0TwV+VOTEV254jXg6/L+0MQSQby ItBnrCMZNR0/eeeCpF5N+VLM0ti8ZNnhzK4x5OOft+Af+nfdAnUn2RF4vahMs9UJhs cGjBO+icC+URevcY8WzH0QQlJ7UcXR3EH+eoOYOI= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1406892267; x=1406978667; i=@elandsys.com; bh=NfIRcQaaDTk8iNOnVCofgx2v+JRXZXTmON5cBQZ8vHw=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=uppmdy5q+/iigzVZ5R5Zj5r7bXGiLraDyw5+FhIgKCnWYbPKVToP7JKF9Y58Pe4rs 63+ymPu46JH2S8YyjDjh4vzeXIH8qtK1n3LiHf5VAbjwdYkM1L00oGf6NQtrhIz095 trJmHDlxjUw9Ukyf/bLrhPR0q/uM2va09whHOybU= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20140801030919.0bad2ec0@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2014 04:03:27 -0700 To: Abdussalam Baryun , Kathleen Moriarty From: S Moonesamy In-Reply-To: References: <080401cfa981$e3ea1d40$abbe57c0$@olddog.co.uk> <6.2.5.6.2.20140731063247.0cd528e0@elandnews.com> <1C8B79BE-623E-4DE2-9507-DB9D0511E900@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/h0-fAxPCLYmqYuAGtUODibtMER8 Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Ignored by WG chairs or WG editors X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Aug 2014 11:24:35 -0000 Hi Abdussalam, At 02:59 01-08-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: >It some time does not happen to get consensus on the list only at >meetings, but usually no objection or complaints from community. If >chairs are busy may be community are busy as well, but IETF should >be busy to its business and future. IETF should have blocking of >undesirable situations in lists or in meetings. The above mentions that there wasn't any objection or complaint from the community (which I interpret as the working group participants). It is mentioned that there was consensus at meetings and, if I understood correctly, there wasn't consensus on the mailing list on the adoption of the draft. I assume that this is within the Routing Area. I suggest providing some information (off-list) to the Routing Area Directors ( http://tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/ ). >Yes, so now we are starting discussing it and documenting the >observation and discussion on this list then some one will get >interested to write or present to the IETF meetings. I suggest waiting until the end of this month to see whether there is input from other participants about this matter. >Therefore, the best way in this discussion to discuss how IETF >avoids this claim to happen ( no need to find out reasons of failure >or misunderstandings or mistakes), the most important thing did IETF >make it clear to its positions not to do such reaction. Did IETF >confirm that it does not allow silence in discussions/replays to >community within WG? Let us solve by targeting IETF not targeting >observers or managers/editors. What is the meaning of "IETF" in the above? I am asking this question as it is not possible to comment about whether the "IETF confirm ..." when the meaning of "IETF" is not clear. >Does IETF organisation/procedures/General-Area/RFCs-related >consider/understand the word or does it mention/consider such >situation that is making some damage in the IETF future and that >IETF considers solving. I gave my personal opinion. It is not the opinion of an organisation called "IETF"; it is not an opinion documented in any procedures; it is not an opinion of the General Area; it is not a word mentioned in any related RFCs. >What am interested to know were those inputs from WG chairs or WG >editors? If yes then what did IETF do to solve? If both don't care >then IMHO it is bad for IETF future. There is a recording of the plenary at http://recordings.conf.meetecho.com/Playout/watch.jsp?recording=IETF90_ADMIN_PLENARY&chapter=chapter_0 >I think within discussions and work process we should be interacting >equally to all without considering those. For example, if a chair or >AD asks a question in any room/WG/list a quick respond will be >received may be different if they posted with a unknown name (this >test can be tried by management and for their analysis if they want >to investigate IETF behavior). The organisation diversity >considerations as we have in our engineering security >considerations, does our protocol/procedure/RFC/positions >consider/allow increase in diversity/security? If I understood the above correctly, the comments from people with unknown names are ignored. >What about reminders to them all, as when AD put on his hat he/she >is reminded of such considerations. So the IETF top-bottom project >is more about taking more attention/reaction on higher positions to >consider diversity development, therefore, we can say IETF is more >diversity understanding/considering. In the previous (quoted) paragraph it is mentioned that "within discussions and work process we should be interacting equally to all without considering those". My understanding of the word "diversity" in the above paragraph is that it is about a person with an unknown name. What is being suggested is that there should be more attention to comments from a person with an unknown name. Regards, S. Moonesamy From nobody Sat Aug 2 02:58:17 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25CC01A0B0D for ; Sat, 2 Aug 2014 02:58:15 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 VlgIIvOhGdVW for ; Sat, 2 Aug 2014 02:58:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yh0-x22b.google.com (mail-yh0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::22b]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D40E1ABB22 for ; Sat, 2 Aug 2014 02:58:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yh0-f43.google.com with SMTP id 29so3203206yhl.30 for ; Sat, 02 Aug 2014 02:58:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=VTPVExDnKrtRgI58fDYlvPkgJ3k76OVT4A/6HMajjfI=; b=0ZqZffgpx5QXAF3X0NhX2cD0bWPyhAf1/Y+X4MRPQKomEdxAafnp1WzP+/X6q3UFwQ ynheMwXPqPd6IHMmJZ9r07Y+Nhyuvx+gSxuoxQuQ3/gobZQ6MZzBRIssoUsvt/mRu0sn H+lCIx0PU+gl/uyWBLLfr/IkC6XCY9uHM3gxE2u1Cke5yu+GlIj6RYDBW83z3w/reGo9 rp3GJtItoVvYVvGe+/UJn2jlTxWj24WOmlbZoqhXbHf5uOX1Y65W37xbxL/zZ6VyiZGJ a16xBqgFY/oIgcTmBSsSUCGMHakQfchpK7hxKvzQ4nZrGL6e1tBsuWrJvbcucFzua3BU e3mg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.100.171 with SMTP id z31mr16964710yhf.70.1406973491454; Sat, 02 Aug 2014 02:58:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.44.216 with HTTP; Sat, 2 Aug 2014 02:58:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20140801030919.0bad2ec0@elandnews.com> References: <080401cfa981$e3ea1d40$abbe57c0$@olddog.co.uk> <6.2.5.6.2.20140731063247.0cd528e0@elandnews.com> <1C8B79BE-623E-4DE2-9507-DB9D0511E900@gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20140801030919.0bad2ec0@elandnews.com> Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2014 11:58:11 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: S Moonesamy Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf301b64852aa71404ffa28b79 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/bFDmaRjb3WQ-42jA_5pkPtM0aGg Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , Kathleen Moriarty Subject: Re: [Diversity] Ignored by WG chairs or WG editors X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2014 09:58:15 -0000 --20cf301b64852aa71404ffa28b79 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi Moonesamy, If I was some one that don't consider diversity, then I will check what are you as male/female, manager/officer, academic/industry, from-large-company/from-small-company, etc. then I will react to you in different ways depending of the above items. That behaviour is not right and will not help IETF to diversify, so that way of reaction should not get into IETF positions (chairs, editors, etc). IMHO We (i.e. IETF general area community) don't want IETF to be drived by only big industry companies, or drived by only big countries. The internet was created by an organisation not by a person. Usually organisations are more important for countries than the persons, communities gather within organisations and bodies. Replies below, On Friday, August 1, 2014, S Moonesamy wrote: > Hi Abdussalam, > At 02:59 01-08-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: > >> It some time does not happen to get consensus on the list only at >> meetings, but usually no objection or complaints from community. If chairs >> are busy may be community are busy as well, but IETF should be busy to its >> business and future. IETF should have blocking of undesirable situations in >> lists or in meetings. >> > > The above mentions that there wasn't any objection or complaint from the > community (which I interpret as the working group participants). It is > mentioned that there was consensus at meetings and, if I understood > correctly, there wasn't consensus on the mailing list on the adoption of > the draft. I assume that this is within the Routing Area. I suggest > providing some information (off-list) to the Routing Area Directors ( > http://tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/ ). The above means the community or WGs don't usually complain or object about process, even when they are not busy and chair is busy, so IETF should do something. > > Yes, so now we are starting discussing it and documenting the observation >> and discussion on this list then some one will get interested to write or >> present to the IETF meetings. >> > > I suggest waiting until the end of this month to see whether there is > input from other participants about this matter. This list is not a WG list, the IETF general area has no adopted ietf work related to community diversity. > Therefore, the best way in this discussion to discuss how IETF avoids >> this claim to happen ( no need to find out reasons of failure or >> misunderstandings or mistakes), the most important thing did IETF make it >> clear to its positions not to do such reaction. Did IETF confirm that it >> does not allow silence in discussions/replays to community within WG? Let >> us solve by targeting IETF not targeting observers or managers/editors. >> > > What is the meaning of "IETF" in the above? I am asking this question as > it is not possible to comment about whether the "IETF confirm ..." when the > meaning of "IETF" is not clear. We are working in IETF. Any input from you to IETF it becomes owned by IETF. IETF is an organisation that exists and is registered. IETF has representatives, so you can speak to the IETF through the IETF chair, Jari is the current representative, so IETF can speak to you to explain what it is. I receive messages from IETF and you do as well, so do you still don't define it. The meaning of IETF is very clear if you read about it in the net or in its documents. IETF is an organisation with objectives, business, structure and system, all organisations have that and they have speakers for it and decision making system and process system. Usually who study engineering and computer science don't consider that organisations think, plan, speak , and decide, but who study business consider that organisations think, plan, speak and decide. > Does IETF organisation/procedures/General-Area/RFCs-related >> consider/understand the word or does it mention/consider such situation >> that is making some damage in the IETF future and that IETF considers >> solving. >> > > I gave my personal opinion. It is not the opinion of an organisation > called "IETF"; it is not an opinion documented in any procedures; it is not > an opinion of the General Area; it is not a word mentioned in any related > RFCs. I know that you are not speaker for IETF. However, the questions means that there is a need for IETF to involve to solve not just wait for DT to solve or from a small participant to solve. There is no WG in general area, do you know this. > What am interested to know were those inputs from WG chairs or WG >> editors? If yes then what did IETF do to solve? If both don't care then >> IMHO it is bad for IETF future. >> > > There is a recording of the plenary at http://recordings.conf. > meetecho.com/Playout/watch.jsp?recording=IETF90_ADMIN_ > PLENARY&chapter=chapter_0 The questions can be answered directly as if some one is saying busy and he/she is chair then the IETF is having a problem, you gave examples of inputs complaining of issues but you example did not mention their diversity position (were they chairs, editors, AD, participant). Is there minutes written in IETF general area for the above meeting subject or this meeting effort done? > > I think within discussions and work process we should be interacting >> equally to all without considering those. For example, if a chair or AD >> asks a question in any room/WG/list a quick respond will be received may be >> different if they posted with a unknown name (this test can be tried by >> management and for their analysis if they want to investigate IETF >> behavior). The organisation diversity considerations as we have in our >> engineering security considerations, does our protocol/procedure/RFC/positions >> consider/allow increase in diversity/security? >> > > If I understood the above correctly, the comments from people with unknown > names are ignored. Yes, ignored by known IETF people, so in IETF who feels known in IETF may ignore new/remote participant, which IMHO still IETF allows that even if the ignorer was WG chair/editor. The IETF community to be diverse needs to welcome and respond to new names that are not known by IETF especially when new participants are making effort related to an IETF draft. > > What about reminders to them all, as when AD put on his hat he/she is >> reminded of such considerations. So the IETF top-bottom project is more >> about taking more attention/reaction on higher positions to consider >> diversity development, therefore, we can say IETF is more diversity >> understanding/considering. >> > > In the previous (quoted) paragraph it is mentioned that "within > discussions and work process we should be interacting equally to all > without considering those". My understanding of the word "diversity" in > the above paragraph is that it is about a person with an unknown name. > What is being suggested is that there should be more attention to comments > from a person with an unknown name. Not only unknown name, diversity is about minority not getting chance to be known and treated the same as other majority. What is minority or majority related? It is either relationship, position, gender, origin, religion, industry, academic, etc. The unknown name can be both the participant's name or his/her company/university/country. For example if majority of participants are from one country they usually know its companies through its products/standards, the majority participant usually ignores to discuss other standards/issues related to new participants' known issues. Some may say then the new participant should write a new draft, but why not they work together and interact in the WG without ignorance behaviour. AB --20cf301b64852aa71404ffa28b79 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Moonesamy,

If I was some one that don'= t consider diversity, then I will check what are you as=C2=A0male/female, m= anager/officer, academic/industry, from-large-company/from-small-company,= =C2=A0etc. then I will react to you in different ways depending of the abov= e items. That behaviour is not right and will not help IETF to diversify, s= o that way of reaction=C2=A0should not get into IETF positions (chairs, edi= tors, etc). IMHO=C2=A0We (i.e. IETF general area=C2=A0community)=C2=A0don&#= 39;t want IETF to be drived by only=C2=A0big industry companies, or=C2=A0dr= ived by only=C2=A0big countries.=C2=A0

The internet was created by an organisation not by a person.= Usually organisations are more important for countries than the persons, c= ommunities gather within organisations and bodies. Replies below,

On Friday, August 1, 2014, S Moonesamy wrote:
Hi Abdussalam,
At 02:59 01-08-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
It some time does not happen to get consensus on the list only at meetings,= but usually no objection or complaints from community. If chairs are busy = may be community are busy as well, but IETF should be busy to its business = and future. IETF should have blocking of undesirable situations in lists or= in meetings.

The above mentions that there wasn't any objection or complaint from th= e community (which I interpret as the working group participants). =C2=A0It= is mentioned that there was consensus at meetings and, if I understood cor= rectly, there wasn't consensus on the mailing list on the adoption of t= he draft. =C2=A0I assume that this is within the Routing Area. =C2=A0I sugg= est providing some information (off-list) to the Routing Area Directors ( <= a href=3D"http://tools.ietf.org/area/rtg/" target=3D"_blank">http://tools.i= etf.org/area/rtg/ ).

The above means the community or WGs don't usually = complain or object about process, even when they are not busy and chair is = busy, so IETF should do something.=C2=A0
=C2=A0

Yes, so now we are starting discussing it and documenting the observation a= nd discussion on this list then some one will get interested to write or pr= esent to the IETF meetings.

I suggest waiting until the end of this month to see whether there is input= from other participants about this matter.

This list is not a WG list, the IETF=C2=A0general area has no adopted=C2= =A0ietf=C2=A0work related to community diversity.=C2=A0


Therefore, the best way in this discussion to discuss how IETF avoids this = claim to happen ( no need to find out reasons of failure or misunderstandin= gs or mistakes), the most important thing did IETF make it clear to its pos= itions not to do such reaction. Did IETF confirm that it does not allow sil= ence in discussions/replays to community within WG? Let us solve by targeti= ng IETF not targeting observers or managers/editors.

What is the meaning of "IETF" in the above? =C2=A0I am asking thi= s question as it is not possible to comment about whether the "IETF co= nfirm ..." when the meaning of "IETF" is not clear.

We are working in IETF. Any input from you to IETF it b= ecomes owned by IETF. IETF is an organisation that exists and is registered= . IETF has representatives, so you can speak to the IETF through the IETF c= hair, Jari is the current representative, so IETF can speak to you to expla= in what it is. I receive messages from IETF and you do as well, so do you s= till don't define it. The meaning of IETF is very clear if you read abo= ut it in the net or in its documents.=C2=A0=C2=A0

IETF is an organisation with objectives, business,=C2= =A0structure and system, all organisations have that and they have speakers= for it and decision making system and process system. Usually who=C2=A0stu= dy engineering and computer science don't consider=C2=A0that organisati= ons think, plan,=C2=A0speak , and decide,=C2=A0but who study business consi= der that organisations think, plan, speak=C2=A0and decide.=C2=A0


Does IETF organisation/procedures/General-Area/RFCs-related consider= /understand the word or does it mention/consider such situation that is mak= ing some damage in the IETF future and that IETF considers solving.

I gave my personal opinion. =C2=A0It is not the opinion of an organisation = called "IETF"; it is not an opinion documented in any procedures;= it is not an opinion of the General Area; it is not a word mentioned in an= y related RFCs.

I know that you are not speaker for IETF. However, the = questions means that there is a need for IETF to involve to solve not just = wait for DT to solve or from a small participant to solve. There is no WG i= n general area, do you know this.=C2=A0=C2=A0


What am interested to know were those inputs from WG chairs or WG editors? = If yes then what did IETF do to solve? If both don't care then IMHO it = is bad for IETF future.

There is a recording of the plenary at http://recordings.conf.meetecho.com/= Playout/watch.jsp?recording=3DIETF90_ADMIN_PLENARY&chapte= r=3Dchapter_0

The questions can be answered directly as if some one i= s saying busy and he/she is chair then the IETF is having a problem, you ga= ve examples of inputs complaining of issues but you example did not mention= their diversity position (were they chairs, editors, AD, participant).=C2= =A0Is there minutes written in IETF general area for the above meeting=C2= =A0subject or this meeting=C2=A0effort done?
=C2=A0

I think within discussions and work process we should be interacting equall= y to all without considering those. For example, if a chair or AD asks a qu= estion in any room/WG/list a quick respond will be received may be differen= t if they posted with a unknown name (this test can be tried by management = and for their analysis if they want to investigate IETF behavior). The orga= nisation diversity considerations as we have in our engineering security co= nsiderations, does our protocol/procedure/RFC/positions consider/all= ow increase in diversity/security?

If I understood the above correctly, the comments from people with unknown = names are ignored.

Yes, ignored by known IE= TF=C2=A0people, so=C2=A0in IETF who feels known in IETF may ignore new/remo= te=C2=A0participant, which IMHO still IETF allows that even if the=C2=A0ign= orer was WG=C2=A0chair/editor. The IETF=C2=A0community to be=C2=A0diverse n= eeds to welcome and respond to new names that are not known by IETF especia= lly when new participants are making effort related to an IETF draft.=C2=A0=
=C2=A0

What about reminders to them all, as when AD put on his hat he/she is remin= ded of such considerations. So the IETF top-bottom project is more about ta= king more attention/reaction on higher positions to consider diversity deve= lopment, therefore, we can say IETF is more diversity understanding/conside= ring.

In the previous (quoted) paragraph it is mentioned that "within discus= sions and work process we should be interacting equally to all without cons= idering those". =C2=A0My understanding of the word "diversity&quo= t; in the above paragraph is that it is about a person with an unknown name= . =C2=A0What is being suggested is that there should be more attention to c= omments from a person with an unknown name.

Not only unknown name, diversity is about minority not = getting chance to be known and treated the same as other majority. What is = minority or majority related? It is either relationship,=C2=A0position, gen= der, origin, religion,=C2=A0=C2=A0industry, academic, etc.=C2=A0

The unknown name can be both the participant's name= or his/her company/university/country. For example if majority of particip= ants are from one country they usually know its companies through its=C2=A0= products/standards, the majority participant usually ignores=C2=A0to discus= s other standards/issues related to new participants'=C2=A0known issues= .=C2=A0Some may say then the new participant should write a new draft, but = why not they work together and interact=C2=A0in the WG without ignorance be= haviour.=C2=A0

AB
--20cf301b64852aa71404ffa28b79-- From nobody Sat Aug 2 08:31:09 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C3B71AD6B1 for ; Sat, 2 Aug 2014 08:31:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 ysD3TiYuOyjT for ; Sat, 2 Aug 2014 08:30:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yh0-x236.google.com (mail-yh0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3AA381A004D for ; Sat, 2 Aug 2014 08:30:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yh0-f54.google.com with SMTP id v1so3323173yhn.27 for ; Sat, 02 Aug 2014 08:30:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=13biY7LFgOIEmDg30Bx96cwIlMr966d26M6HV/Wnpqs=; b=edfPq+NExzOjjyBBIcrq8L3IKUhkkFmSluT05+KDlQMLch6ZC3vkglH2S5r9cYTrPh 2iOExE82Mx3BVHdVBfBywamO+PAyrEFIBSskfTbkoWO4w2XQGYwl2vJ13PXViMq0ZEXo X3yGZTQ1/8u5gvDRueFZZSj1eeL0jR69TGReLK318oKjRDACtODPL2XSV/WUClpNgcQ9 9Qja0oVDeoYAJskjkv9TOrvoUx6Go177Ag7fNUcyMPkGT4z6FiNNu+ie1ZtzODqM/4IV VySrlIlFYIAcWShzsYa1O6fPDIUrXAgWSZFvGnue5BBbKcpcKcSr0MOwCbCRqUaJwwou HOpQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.170.38 with SMTP id o26mr2820652yhl.182.1406993458475; Sat, 02 Aug 2014 08:30:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.44.216 with HTTP; Sat, 2 Aug 2014 08:30:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20140727222541.0d3297b0@resistor.net> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140727115546.0ca84fd0@resistor.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20140727222541.0d3297b0@resistor.net> Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2014 17:30:58 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: S Moonesamy Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf302d4e2a4b373604ffa73175 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/I4PFzItQAYPbuJsMaNAY2CTwfHQ Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , Kathleen Moriarty Subject: Re: [Diversity] civility in wg interactions X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2014 15:31:08 -0000 --20cf302d4e2a4b373604ffa73175 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Monday, July 28, 2014, S Moonesamy wrote: > > There was a letter written in March 2013. There has been an IETF > statement related to behavior. A draft, intended as a BCP, has been > discussed. Have there been any results since then? I don't really know. I don't know as well. The problem is that general area is weak and is not functioning well. How can we track those work related to general area while general area has no dispatch WG or at least one WG? The only able to answer is IESG or AD responsible. Because authors of such draft could have been discouraged. > > I followed a few sessions remotely. It was the usual (not bad). The > plenary highlighted that there are a lot of people who do not read the ietf@ > mailing list and there is high probability that they do not read this > mailing list. These people have the ability to influence the choice of > IESG members. If they do influence then IESG is weak, because only the community should influence IESG and that is done through consensus not through non diversity considerations. Some of these people have been in the IETF longer than most of the people > on this mailing list. I doubt that education would work. IMHO, May be because they are not educated. Or they think they are the only smart people on the earth, such behavior is damaging the IETF future. > There are advantages and disadvantages for calling out specific behavior. I don't agree. We don't need non educated people or people that just want to influence without community decisions and without IETF procedures. > The advantage is that people do not see a problem unless it is pointed out > to them. A disadvantage is that it is bad for one's career. Will there be > a loss of expertise if specific behavior is being called out? Yes. IMHO No, we will get more real experience in. I some times feel that IETF has cow boys that are influencing. Do you think we got in the IETF the real internet experts of the world? I think we take influence out the bad and influence in the good expert while all are experts ( the ugly may be left and guided). > As a formal comment, the IESG is responsible for behavioral matters. I disagree, because IETF is about community, so we should work together to fix IESG or fix IETF or fix our work procedure. The IETF general area is the real responsible body and it is weak and needs work. AB --20cf302d4e2a4b373604ffa73175 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Monday, July 28, 2014, S Moonesamy wrote:
=C2=A0=C2=A0
There was a letter written in March 2013. =C2=A0There has been an IETF stat= ement related to behavior. =C2=A0A draft, intended as a BCP, has been discu= ssed. =C2=A0Have there been any results since then? =C2=A0I don't reall= y know.

I don't know as well. The problem is that general a= rea is weak and is not functioning well. How can we track those work relate= d to general area while general area has no dispatch WG or at least one WG?= The only able to answer is IESG or AD responsible. Because authors of such= draft could have been discouraged.=C2=A0

=C2=A0

I followed a few sessions remotely. =C2=A0It was the usual (not bad). =C2= =A0The plenary highlighted that there are a lot of people who do not read t= he ietf@ mailing list and there is high probability that they do not read t= his mailing list. =C2=A0These people have the ability to influence the choi= ce of IESG members. =C2=A0

If they do = influence then IESG is weak, because only the community should influence IE= SG and that is done through consensus not through non diversity considerati= ons.=C2=A0


Some of these = people have been in the IETF longer than most of the people on this mailing= list. =C2=A0I doubt that education would work.

IMHO,=C2=A0May be because they are not educated. Or the= y think they are the only smart people on the earth, such behavior is damag= ing the IETF future.=C2=A0


There are advantages and disadvantages for calling out specific behavior. = =C2=A0

I don't agree. We don't need non educated people or people that jus= t want to influence without community decisions and without IETF procedures= .=C2=A0
=C2=A0
The advantage is that people do not see a problem unless it is pointed out = to them. =C2=A0A disadvantage is that it is bad for one's career. =C2= =A0Will there be a loss of expertise if specific behavior is being called o= ut? =C2=A0Yes.

IMHO=C2=A0No, we will get more real experience in. I so= me times feel that IETF has cow boys that are influencing.=C2=A0Do you thin= k we got in the=C2=A0IETF the real internet=C2=A0experts of the world? I th= ink we take influence=C2=A0out the bad=C2=A0and influence=C2=A0in the good = expert=C2=A0while all are experts ( the ugly may be left and=C2=A0guided).= =C2=A0


As a formal comment, the IESG is responsible for behavioral matters. =C2=A0=

I disagree, because IETF is about community, so we should work together t= o fix IESG or fix IETF or fix our work procedure. The IETF general area is = the real responsible body and it is weak and needs work.=C2=A0


AB
--20cf302d4e2a4b373604ffa73175-- From nobody Sun Aug 3 04:14:15 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AF071A02E3 for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2014 04:14:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.952 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.952 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DATE_IN_PAST_12_24=1.049, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=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 pVp8y9SyTUir for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2014 04:14:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FE701A02DF for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2014 04:14:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.226.235.219]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s73BDoal017314 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 3 Aug 2014 04:14:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1407064444; x=1407150844; bh=MSv3v69Yu/xIykBa1OuPpYgS+e44w0tul6u/+c3HXwc=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=dPQKFOUVh0ihCqJ4i5HAPAsfRe2e3ptQ5okg4GDbtYTCIAWRirlVmxQhXAFf+zWbP /kVuQ0zWVj1CZtGFL/KuogtG+WP5to32P8ag6w/wF/T0tNqU53+qxy5/qFKeMiqLhg MdpP2nBJcOziXGJ5rpCs7Okc5sT/ahaXSw9CVnlQ= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1407064444; x=1407150844; i=@elandsys.com; bh=MSv3v69Yu/xIykBa1OuPpYgS+e44w0tul6u/+c3HXwc=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=QKdYYnz2LcIiHBe03ASLe7DDT904wHC5tIWGpj3JrljXNYAs/HAlc39UGjwuVaJvP GlmBiEH3iel+uq27aOgL0+lHP52XyfSmRSPcG+lYIYojT9SMCRRbNXB0njSFTWVH7E VI9imozkfOMnblORXtcjKpsBnVCwqkq7SHmsUe30= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20140802055117.0b937920@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sat, 02 Aug 2014 09:43:56 -0700 To: Abdussalam Baryun From: S Moonesamy In-Reply-To: References: <080401cfa981$e3ea1d40$abbe57c0$@olddog.co.uk> <6.2.5.6.2.20140731063247.0cd528e0@elandnews.com> <1C8B79BE-623E-4DE2-9507-DB9D0511E900@gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20140801030919.0bad2ec0@elandnews.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/mXleYH8sWjNc7KwvpUcEWCn9cjA Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Ignored by WG chairs or WG editors X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2014 11:14:12 -0000 Hi Abdussalam, At 02:58 02-08-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: >The above means the community or WGs don't usually complain or >object about process, even when they are not busy and chair is busy, >so IETF should do something. I'll use a case to explain my opinion. There is a write-up at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg12415.html There weren't any complaints or objections to what is written in that message. I don't see any reason to do something to change that. In my personal opinion people usually complain when they think that there is a problem. My guess is that there are very little (public) objections about process. An Area Director can ask me to provide an explanation for what I wrote. In this case I would have to provide information to show why I think that there are very little objections. >This list is not a WG list, the IETF general area has no adopted >ietf work related to community diversity. My understanding of the above is that my previous suggestion has been rejected because of process. >We are working in IETF. Any input from you to IETF it becomes owned >by IETF. IETF is an organisation that exists and is registered. IETF >has representatives, so you can speak to the IETF through the IETF >chair, Jari is the current representative, so IETF can speak to you >to explain what it is. I receive messages from IETF and you do as >well, so do you still don't define it. The meaning of IETF is very >clear if you read about it in the net or in its documents. Getting back to your question, it is about whether the IETF Chair confirmed "that it does not allow silence in discussions/replays to community within WG". RFC 2418 discusses about working group matters. >IETF is an organisation with objectives, business, structure and >system, all organisations have that and they have speakers for it >and decision making system and process system. Usually who study >engineering and computer science don't consider that organisations >think, plan, speak , and decide, but who study business consider >that organisations think, plan, speak and decide. Ok. >I know that you are not speaker for IETF. However, the questions >means that there is a need for IETF to involve to solve not just >wait for DT to solve or from a small participant to solve. There is >no WG in general area, do you know this. I am aware that there aren't any working groups in the General Area. >The questions can be answered directly as if some one is saying busy >and he/she is chair then the IETF is having a problem, you gave >examples of inputs complaining of issues but you example did not >mention their diversity position (were they chairs, editors, AD, >participant). Is there minutes written in IETF general area for the >above meeting subject or this meeting effort done? There are the minutes of proceedings (http://www.ietf.org/meeting/proceedings.html ). The minutes for the last meeting are not available yet. >Yes, ignored by known IETF people, so in IETF who feels known in >IETF may ignore new/remote participant, which IMHO still IETF allows >that even if the ignorer was WG chair/editor. The IETF community to >be diverse needs to welcome and respond to new names that are not >known by IETF especially when new participants are making effort >related to an IETF draft. I'll comment below. >Not only unknown name, diversity is about minority not getting >chance to be known and treated the same as other majority. What is >minority or majority related? It is either relationship, position, >gender, origin, religion, industry, academic, etc. There is a message at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/diversity/current/msg00566.html I read that message and I read the two paragraphs quoted above. The comments are inconsistent. For example, one comment could be understood as: Mr Baryun thinks "within discussions and work process we should be interacting equally to all without considering" relationship, position, gender, origin, religion, industry, academic, etc. Or: Mr Baryun thinks that the IETF community needs to give people a chance to be known as they are currently not known because of their relationship, position, gender, origin, religion, industry, academic, etc. >For example if majority of participants are from one country they >usually know its companies through its products/standards, the >majority participant usually ignores to discuss other >standards/issues related to new participants' known issues. In other words, some participants from one country do not want to discuss about an issue raised by a new participant. If the issue is about a technical problem the new participant can send his or her objection to the Working Group Chair. If the issue is about the process followed by the working group the new participant can also send his or her objection to the Working Group Chair. In both cases, it is up to the new participant to explain the issue. If the objection was, for example: Why was issue X ignored? it will be rejected as it does not contain any information about why issue X is a problem. If the objection was, for example: I have an objection as the working group did not follow the process. it will be rejected as it does not contain any information about the steps which were not followed. >Some may say then the new participant should write a new draft, but >why not they work together and interact in the WG without ignorance behaviour I don't think that it is possible to make Person X work or interact with Person Y if Person X does not want to do that. Regards, S. Moonesamy From nobody Sun Aug 3 04:14:45 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04FC71A02E7 for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2014 04:14:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 Za7JxiKynZAj for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2014 04:14:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F4CC1A02E6 for ; Sun, 3 Aug 2014 04:14:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.226.235.219]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s73BDoan017314 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 3 Aug 2014 04:14:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1407064448; x=1407150848; bh=jfKTZUXcAgoTo/dP2J5G554xh419cMAICD8iSCmKHno=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=ycMvDugR3YQrGqcwYQX72dLB7dEE1Kz0RUeETsHcubREq6YHbtEurFgNrSPBRbnLz 4HV2t5zYcK0u7g0wVL9lqYhZE+iGAWECMBAQuGeaj7uD/Tq07bvLu2j7EY7E7al0In W1h0vrUQliEunbn5yugyd757wyfomnpAFXtPuwqk= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1407064448; x=1407150848; i=@elandsys.com; bh=jfKTZUXcAgoTo/dP2J5G554xh419cMAICD8iSCmKHno=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=0dqb7uAEHWBYtctgUOAvTvOOANJMYd/KLJo31lCu/FYFYgMI17nNYFcekpTu3o6qq fZ8Uz/cWXb7WkV4Hqt2/WddRkUHYNaFwHVW1XcpfV+ZyiJWS/z7aq0y4ptQncbbnt0 fqCgAQFbiG7ZCqRU325+EIeMJPmZ3T7DDyN4kPtU= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20140803024710.0cc2fb48@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2014 03:31:09 -0700 To: Abdussalam Baryun From: S Moonesamy In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140727115546.0ca84fd0@resistor.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20140727222541.0d3297b0@resistor.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/0ICTSro68hUaMF6lcPzgQQBZ06k Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] civility in wg interactions X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 03 Aug 2014 11:14:20 -0000 Hi Abdussalam, At 08:30 02-08-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: >How can we track those work related to general area while general >area has no dispatch WG or at least one WG? There is an IETF mailing list to comment about general topics ( https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ). >Do you think we got in the IETF the real internet experts of the world? There are some persons in the IETF who have the expertise to review some of the technologies used on the internet. Regards, S. Moonesamy From nobody Mon Aug 4 04:21:57 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB33C1B2A26 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 04:21:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 MG7NB64y4Zoj for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 04:21:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yk0-x235.google.com (mail-yk0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CDEE31B2A1B for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 04:21:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yk0-f181.google.com with SMTP id q200so4008691ykb.40 for ; Mon, 04 Aug 2014 04:21:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=VavhWBW9atMan9U006qn5USIfSHa27a2Gz9MnGrBfXU=; b=PqNqEMQAzyPZVDr3kR0dd2NvslokGS2XWw+igGlU8/cXEMIDm0Q1B/aFKIZCslL4k3 tWk0U5oGNh4T7vsJ587plJ9dgq8mbtxwe6CetfqQRAdqZmhFtS1WHOLZm91TDiYe86dX V7KdGB/ND8jEcLAP/2vIWE/CgDnMsw6bGaY+PsMByrZErNiscV+VpYMKEEZ49JNA1THz gLYBTLLmObjaalqH6E5ezsROhvAf0paWoYDg4QjNVy42tZo+3v0cpoLte5YXeMvU8U+u 8uwy9a1TrSnwpLKprweJzVWX/XqF5Dfm8wvF+K7tXC4yzeMKU48AipFEsB41r+sCiULk Uh2A== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.203.33 with SMTP id e21mr38339992yho.92.1407151310121; Mon, 04 Aug 2014 04:21:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.44.216 with HTTP; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 04:21:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20140803024710.0cc2fb48@elandnews.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140727115546.0ca84fd0@resistor.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20140727222541.0d3297b0@resistor.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20140803024710.0cc2fb48@elandnews.com> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2014 13:21:50 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: S Moonesamy Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0158bfd0fc34c304ffcbf1ab Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/-YsXooibCcxkS4ojbHXSnUrK33A Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] civility in wg interactions X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2014 11:21:54 -0000 --089e0158bfd0fc34c304ffcbf1ab Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hello Moonesamy; On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 12:31 PM, S Moonesamy wrote: > Hi Abdussalam, > > At 08:30 02-08-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: > >> How can we track those work related to general area while general area >> has no dispatch WG or at least one WG? >> > > There is an IETF mailing list to comment about general topics ( > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ). > > That IETF mailing list seems not to be related to the General Area because the area has no WG so far. IMO The list is a space for all areas including the general one. The IETF list is not considering diversity and has many impolite posters. > > Do you think we got in the IETF the real internet experts of the world? >> > > There are some persons in the IETF who have the expertise to review some > of the technologies used on the internet. > Yes IETF has some but that reply was against the reply saying that we got experts that may leave if we comment on their impolite behavior. while I never seen experts in the world that are not polite. I beleive if there are some expert that are impolite then it means he or she works alone and if they work alone then they cannot be experts. The beauty of IETF is that its experts dont work alone this is the IETF principle of WGs. So IETF becomes the real expert in the field and better than all experts only if it is more diversified and does not allow editors/private_groups to work alone. So real experts dont work alone and have excellent behavior. AB --089e0158bfd0fc34c304ffcbf1ab Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello Moonesamy;

On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 12:31 PM, S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> wrote:
Hi Abdussalam,=20

At 08:30 02-08-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
How can we track those work related t= o general area while general area has no dispatch WG or at least one WG?

There is an IETF mailing list to comment about gener= al topics ( https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ).=20

=C2=A0
=C2=A0
That IETF mailing list seems not to be related to the General Area bec= ause the area has no WG so far. IMO=C2=A0The list is a space for all areas = including the general one. The IETF list is not considering diversity and h= as many impolite posters.
=C2=A0

Do you think we got in the IETF the r= eal internet experts of the world?

There are some= persons in the IETF who have the expertise to review some of the technolog= ies used on the internet.
=C2=A0
Yes IETF has some but that reply was against the reply saying that we = got experts that may leave if we comment on their impolite behavior. while = I never seen experts in the world that are not polite. I beleive if there a= re some expert that=C2=A0are=C2=A0impolite then it means he or she works al= one and if they work alone then they cannot be experts. The beauty of IETF = is that its experts dont work alone this is the IETF principle of WGs. So I= ETF becomes the real expert in the field and better than all experts only i= f it is more diversified and does not allow editors/private_groups to work = alone. So real experts dont work alone and have excellent behavior.
=C2=A0
AB
=C2=A0
--089e0158bfd0fc34c304ffcbf1ab-- From nobody Mon Aug 4 05:14:07 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A7381B2A94 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 05:14:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -101.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham 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 Vu47kSWMiaeD for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 05:13:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp4.iomartmail.com (asmtp4.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.175]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E2AB41B2A91 for ; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 05:13:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp4.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp4.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s74BwFBh011120; Mon, 4 Aug 2014 12:58:15 +0100 Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp4.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s74BwEqV011113 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 4 Aug 2014 12:58:14 +0100 From: "Adrian Farrel" To: "'Abdussalam Baryun'" , "'S Moonesamy'" References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140727115546.0ca84fd0@resistor.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20140727222541.0d3297b0@resistor.net> <6.2.5.6.2.20140803024710.0cc2fb48@elandnews.com> In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2014 13:13:14 +0100 Message-ID: <047c01cfafdd$7854a480$68fded80$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_047D_01CFAFE5.DA1D2B30" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQIZ+T+Oe2UqNOAf/rvBikmFeqqOGgEaN8wtAhQYAXIBB/F9gQHzL+jmAk0s8L4CHRclaJrXKZlQ Content-Language: en-gb X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1576-7.5.0.1018-20858.006 X-TM-AS-Result: No--29.758-10.0-31-10 X-imss-scan-details: No--29.758-10.0-31-10 X-TMASE-MatchedRID: yebcs53SkkDOlvT/PJ/pVSWpoNP/sfuXy9Hr9JMbCJOUvX/ci5TjsrLx AJXGWRVFticv2F4ZpMB4OOvp+ThFvJRMdwEiWk2NJhb388hdoo9imi8LvNfmr0X5hc8ioB2+oud 5cX9BENOVDOMDY2VD4yAFwbhTQBBrDtBt+r/CzCo7x2kIE2mYtQuK1hIitSIH2viB/Jr4D1S3Cq /Z6GbmSUVdyb8L+SKJ5lwyf5Zg9vdCMOF2vSwLTGFb8qosrs1QOkDbNlgmO/Vhb6wYa04uHds1C HzkaGoiEVtxaPoSt7AQ5/Zf3A3sK7vSniSB5hLEBEfU2vugRF0QJvY8X/Kxm8j0QMA/92m23L7B m2OZ1/422uoEm245foFaNaPuEIbSaWbbDm4LdIZ3vIzA7XyIiCEF1RdqrHVdtdx2lXHjF1Ii/B2 gujrEHzB6EdCmNDGVVbEDP0uzojXyTBeqcpWTVlRe8joruKtpIFb2VdwQdkDROhK+RFWo5lthOg NFYwZakNCK/RB7QjECSHHGjA3FAhfyTevQtfkQkdcpJKX5Jwr8BlbXy+O/WnKuL8SC59l3YCowK SvpI+95QzetarMsxEgF6uuiHQ769Z8q6rO+Ih6Ycl4BgqVyk8MdI0UcXEHzj2iyfwmt0k9o4tOB Mzo2ODw3BSolHKG+16FIKoCRjlU1gbUlmfmxOm/+RwWenb0Yf6/Md8Lb2l8no0smd1GLZADH+SZ FBrRqJIPFmqDDlsqSU848M/hs6Ei8wUMZL0vvi+m1DDPm2yL/fHyH+MCF5RUZTfM00s4+SLg3sS CXGKI1C2f8ND2KYKNC9+Dkbk3PWx8LczCIsNKeAiCmPx4NwGmRqNBHmBve1B0Hk1Q1KyIzqx6Dt fVZti6YfK3K7WcPOUpsrs6gocY1QCYQFr3IwYl4as41rQgXEVgom2mNgQc= Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/IsujHtN8F11T8JAP5grz6K_hho4 Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] civility in wg interactions X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2014 12:14:00 -0000 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_047D_01CFAFE5.DA1D2B30 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I think this thread has digressed a long way from the purpose of this = list and may be causing unnecessary distraction. =20 Forming a WG in the General Area is no different from forming a WG in = any other area. It does not happen by wishing or stating that one should = be formed. It happens when a need is demonstrated for a forum to do = collective work toward a specific deliverable. =20 To drive that (if you want to) you need to: - identify the topic you think needs a working group - write an internet-Draft describing the problem space - gather a group of people who agree with you - request a BoF or the immediate formation of a working group =20 Can we please return this list to the intended topic, viz. =20 > The diversity design team will work on identifying diversity related=20 > issues that the IETF faces and making practical recommendations that = can=20 > help in this regard. This mailing list will be used for obtaining = input=20 > from the community. =20 Thanks, Adrian =20 From: diversity [mailto:diversity-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of = Abdussalam Baryun Sent: 04 August 2014 12:22 To: S Moonesamy Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] civility in wg interactions =20 Hello Moonesamy; On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 12:31 PM, S Moonesamy = wrote: Hi Abdussalam,=20 At 08:30 02-08-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: How can we track those work related to general area while general area = has no dispatch WG or at least one WG? =20 There is an IETF mailing list to comment about general topics ( = https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ).=20 =20 =20 =20 That IETF mailing list seems not to be related to the General Area = because the area has no WG so far. IMO The list is a space for all areas = including the general one. The IETF list is not considering diversity = and has many impolite posters. =20 =20 Do you think we got in the IETF the real internet experts of the world? =20 There are some persons in the IETF who have the expertise to review some = of the technologies used on the internet. =20 Yes IETF has some but that reply was against the reply saying that we = got experts that may leave if we comment on their impolite behavior. = while I never seen experts in the world that are not polite. I beleive = if there are some expert that are impolite then it means he or she works = alone and if they work alone then they cannot be experts. The beauty of = IETF is that its experts dont work alone this is the IETF principle of = WGs. So IETF becomes the real expert in the field and better than all = experts only if it is more diversified and does not allow = editors/private_groups to work alone. So real experts dont work alone = and have excellent behavior. =20 AB =20 ------=_NextPart_000_047D_01CFAFE5.DA1D2B30 Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I think this thread has = digressed a long way from the purpose of this list and may be causing = unnecessary distraction.

 

Forming a WG in the General = Area is no different from forming a WG in any other area. It does not = happen by wishing or stating that one should be formed. It happens when = a need is demonstrated for a forum to do collective work toward a = specific deliverable.

 

To drive that (if you want to) = you need to:

- identify the topic you think = needs a working group

- write an internet-Draft = describing the problem space

- gather a group of people who = agree with you

- request a BoF or the = immediate formation of a working group

 

Can we please return this list = to the intended topic, viz.

 

> The diversity design team = will work on identifying diversity related

> issues that the IETF = faces and making practical recommendations that can =

> help in this regard. This = mailing list will be used for obtaining input

> from the = community.

 

Thanks,

Adrian

 

From: diversity = [mailto:diversity-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Abdussalam = Baryun
Sent: 04 August 2014 12:22
To: S = Moonesamy
Cc: diversity@ietf.org
Subject: Re: = [Diversity] civility in wg = interactions

 

Hello Moonesamy;

On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 12:31 PM, S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> wrote:

Hi Abdussalam,


At 08:30 02-08-2014, Abdussalam Baryun = wrote:

How can we track those work = related to general area while general area has no dispatch WG or at = least one WG?

 

There = is an IETF mailing list to comment about general topics ( https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf ). =

 

 

 

That IETF mailing list seems not to be related to the = General Area because the area has no WG so far. IMO The list is a = space for all areas including the general one. The IETF list is not = considering diversity and has many impolite = posters.

 

 

Do you think = we got in the IETF the real internet experts of the = world?

 

There = are some persons in the IETF who have the expertise to review some of = the technologies used on the = internet.

 

Yes IETF has some but that reply was against the reply = saying that we got experts that may leave if we comment on their = impolite behavior. while I never seen experts in the world that are not = polite. I beleive if there are some expert that are impolite = then it means he or she works alone and if they work alone then they = cannot be experts. The beauty of IETF is that its experts dont work = alone this is the IETF principle of WGs. So IETF becomes the real expert = in the field and better than all experts only if it is more diversified = and does not allow editors/private_groups to work alone. So real experts = dont work alone and have excellent behavior.

 

AB

 

------=_NextPart_000_047D_01CFAFE5.DA1D2B30-- From nobody Tue Aug 5 08:17:47 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C92211B27B0 for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2014 13:43:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.277 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.277 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 hjBktXRQYm50 for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2014 13:43:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-oi0-x22f.google.com (mail-oi0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22f]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B6911B28E7 for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2014 13:43:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-oi0-f47.google.com with SMTP id x69so2542190oia.20 for ; Thu, 24 Jul 2014 13:43:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=5/GTsIoA4S9D3ODt4yX02BMG8OP6Z0YbB90wFu8N0wA=; b=jWP2cpzxYcSWBVoq4JedelnsJEWkLiUNiP1ATpMlB3R95Se9pAKLedBwhTnhJYtoLJ BoiMRCJuaToLQdqM5qpnqv9VdmRWj1CmCzJkuRIHuceqMDUSvGEBU2NI1eLjY41pI7HA Kka5UIORKJc0ugVQ7FtqvrRxXMvKIVFICAksTy5L42uTMBZpmWt8qC+MwtaosPIYXi3f VXF6s148F05KSeF3Rp5Rf5SH9pYFLH1NgeULFA589dFkKYpPzDHvJTY1AOf4133pNsqA TB0zEDDUAIHQaWhFAoNZ9qlgnN7i3327KfhgeeTCI3KpcuR8BQiGsjnZONhbZmr5F1zR +Jig== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.118.38 with SMTP id kj6mr17406373oeb.68.1406234626043; Thu, 24 Jul 2014 13:43:46 -0700 (PDT) Sender: aaronyiding@gmail.com Received: by 10.183.16.162 with HTTP; Thu, 24 Jul 2014 13:43:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 23:43:45 +0300 X-Google-Sender-Auth: UShJxytHAlz8zR5Cg9w2iy8F1Ic Message-ID: From: Aaron Yi DING To: mallman@icir.org, ietf@ietf.org, diversity-dt@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b3a9b105b377c04fef6839e Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/ymuR9xyb9RX4Hf2rSTMrKraN1xY X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 05 Aug 2014 08:17:39 -0700 Subject: [Diversity] SIGCOMM and IETF work RE: v6 adoption X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2014 20:43:47 -0000 --047d7b3a9b105b377c04fef6839e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 23/07/14 22:27, Mark Allman wrote: A shameless flog as it seems like it could be of interest to some folks... Surely relevant! It benefits both sides to follow up the latest progress, either via conferences or IETF pipeline. As part of the work for IETF diversity group, our joint paper between Cambridge and Helsinki got the best paper award from ACM - "Best of CCR", and to be presented in ACM SIGCOMM, August 2014: http://conferences.sigcomm.org/sigcomm/2014/program.php It could be relevant to IETFers, perhaps (including PDF, feedback from ACM Computing Review and chief editor): http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/u/yding/acm2014.html Cheers, Aaron We have been assessing v6 adoption from a bunch of angles lately. We have written up a paper on the results of our analysis that will be presented next month at SIGCOMM. It is: Jakub Czyz, Mark Allman, Jing Zhang, Scott Iekel-Johnson, Eric Osterweil, Michael Bailey. Measuring IPv6 Adoption, ACM SIGCOMM, August 2014. To appear. http://www.icir.org/mallman/pubs/CAZ+14/ Comments certainly welcome. allman ----------- http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~ad707/ --047d7b3a9b105b377c04fef6839e Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 23/07/14 22:27, Mark Allman wrote:= 
A shameless flog as it seems like it could be of interest to some
folks...

Surely relevant!=C2=A0 It benefits both sides to follow up= the latest progress, either via conferences or IETF pipeline.

As part of the work for IETF diversity group, our joint paper between=20 Cambridge and Helsinki got the best paper award from ACM - "Best of CC= R", and to be presented in ACM SIGCOMM, August 2014:
http://conferences.sigcomm.or= g/sigcomm/2014/program.php

It could be relevant to IETFers= , perhaps (including PDF, feedback from ACM Computing Review and chief edit= or):
http://www.cs.he= lsinki.fi/u/yding/acm2014.html

Cheers,
Aaron

We have been assessing v6 adoption from a bunch of angles lately.  W=
e
have written up a paper on the results of our analysis that will be
presented next month at SIGCOMM.  It is:

    Jakub Czyz, Mark Allman, Jing Zhang, Scott Iekel-Johnson,
    Eric Osterweil, Michael Bailey.  <i>Measuring IPv6 Adoption</i=
>,
    ACM SIGCOMM, August 2014.  To appear.
    http://www.icir.or=
g/mallman/pubs/CAZ+14/

Comments certainly welcome.

allman
--047d7b3a9b105b377c04fef6839e-- From nobody Mon Aug 11 00:36:42 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B03DC1A035F for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 00:36:41 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 PEArRca2tFIq for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 00:36:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yk0-x22a.google.com (mail-yk0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::22a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F16411A035D for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 00:36:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yk0-f170.google.com with SMTP id 9so5766604ykp.29 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 00:36:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=Nb21HCAhpH8W3o156MaWoRQ2RI5H/UqYEutMHrnDJow=; b=MjS7bUgQkWO5A6BQ0FKLIgGyFOFsg9/9GgDi2P1JV80TwyRKpNNG68+a+u8r8c3w/S ukctoQqIX5Yt+XaQ80tH3JqeD/rGNsX+3cgirTSkrX+mc1WxtXAjkn0gFEJ1CI6odWVH XK74rquAbRtih7UptANKbApJEppbUJ05FkWXkWlvv7y4K4Uxm4uynqU08dCfOcFxcDhC d6QAQJRNpncKldbwlNLnN8s4FLG96dO3Qiw2xZ70nVoXWq9CTwmwbSCwSkXdG+HTuTA1 f4HzMlZwb3uTs+Zacc9kqhDTr9l8qKmiFQ0oMgZBbwsaeuiWTtGd69HcKLml6GCpEDtZ DvBw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.121.44 with SMTP id q32mr40821485yhh.55.1407742599332; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 00:36:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.44.216 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 00:36:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 09:36:39 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: "adrian@olddog.co.uk" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf300e512f91893a0500559d54 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/kKmDX30tqqF0p1BcURZhKNMTMao Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , S Moonesamy Subject: [Diversity] IETF General Area related to IETF diversity future X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 07:36:41 -0000 --20cf300e512f91893a0500559d54 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi Adrian I think there is huge difference in forming WG for General work and forming WG for specific Internet_engineering work. The biggest problem is that general area is empty with many old participants having reasons not to have one. I first need to know why there is no interest and why do we still have the area open while empty (the area should close as well if no interest any more). On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote: > I think this thread has digressed a long way from the purpose of this > list and may be causing unnecessary distraction. > > Who decided the purpose for this list? I think it is about diversity, and that the general area is mostly rolled by One region's old participants and by current IETF management. > > > Forming a WG in the General Area is no different from forming a WG in any > other area. > > I think it seems similar because a WG is a WG. It is like the discussion on gender, so a man is no different than a woman, still we need diversity because the majority made some perception differences. So WGs are similar but the difference is the goals which are not similar related to internet technology and that participants perceive them differently. General area is related to issues of IETF administration, procedure, and powers. Therefore, who calls for such WG will be mostly facing the big people or one type of community (mostly male, higher positions, etc). > It does not happen by wishing or stating that one should be formed. It > happens when a need is demonstrated for a forum to do collective work > toward a specific deliverable. > > IMHO It happens when there are connections with/between management, then the need demonstrated ... > > > To drive that (if you want to) you need to: > > - identify the topic you think needs a working group > > - write an internet-Draft describing the problem space > > - gather a group of people who agree with you > > - request a BoF or the immediate formation of a working group > > > > Can we please return this list to the intended topic, viz. > > I can do that request only if I get an answer that the community confirms/confirmed that it does/did want the area empty from any WG. I see that empty general area means that IETF is not having the future of full diversity advantages. AB --20cf300e512f91893a0500559d54 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Adrian
=C2=A0
I think there is huge=C2=A0difference in forming=C2=A0WG=C2=A0for Gene= ral=C2=A0work and forming=C2=A0WG for=C2=A0specific Internet_engineering wo= rk. The biggest problem is that general area is empty with many old partici= pants having reasons not to have one. I first need to know why there is no = interest and why do we still have the area open while empty (the area=C2=A0= should close as well if no interest any more).=C2=A0

On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> wrote:

I think this thread has digress= ed a long way from the purpose of this list and may be causing unnecessary = distraction.

Who decided = the purpose for this list? I think it is about diversity, and that the=C2= =A0general area is mostly rolled by One region's=C2=A0old participants = and=C2=A0by current=C2=A0IETF=C2=A0management.=C2=A0

=C2=A0

Forming a WG in the General Are= a is no different from forming a WG in any other area.=C2=A0

I think= it seems similar because a WG is a WG. It is like the discussion on gender= , so a man is no different than a woman, still we need diversity because th= e=C2=A0majority made some perception differences. So WGs are similar=C2=A0b= ut the difference is the goals which=C2=A0are not similar related to intern= et technology and that participants perceive them differently. General area= is related to issues of IETF=C2=A0administration, procedure,=C2=A0=C2=A0an= d powers. Therefore, who calls for such WG will be mostly facing the big pe= ople or one type of community (mostly male, higher positions, etc).=C2=A0

It does not happen by wishing or stating that one should be= formed. It happens when a need is demonstrated for a forum to do collectiv= e work toward a specific deliverable.

IMHO=C2=A0It= happens when there are connections with/between=C2=A0management, then the = need demonstrated ...=C2=A0

=C2=A0

To drive that (if you want to) = you need to:

- identify the topic you think = needs a working group

- write an internet-Draft descr= ibing the problem space

- gather a group of people who = agree with you

- request a BoF or the immediat= e formation of a working group

=C2=A0

Can we please return this list = to the intended topic, viz.

=

=C2=A0I can do that request=C2=A0only i= f I get an answer that the community confirms/confirmed=C2=A0that it does/d= id=C2=A0want the area empty from any WG. I see that empty general area mean= s that IETF is not having the=C2=A0future of full diversity advantages.=C2= =A0

AB
--20cf300e512f91893a0500559d54-- From nobody Mon Aug 11 10:53:11 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FC2A1A0572 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 10:53:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 uvg1ML0HYKYe for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 10:53:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-x22e.google.com (mail-lb0-x22e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::22e]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1242D1A048D for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 10:53:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lb0-f174.google.com with SMTP id c11so6231823lbj.33 for ; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 10:53:03 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=z+5BcOMjVn89uUFIa+YiE4cqmrCQDBPMSftmCW66ctI=; b=YlteXhJoi2bggINbfN3MZTCjQIsz7Z/KWBBebhqPPMTTwMQukuVLdb9ktTH0fXgeqw 2W+eIT6DNztcqGFS/D7rw49BquZdfq/1Ds/1R8TU08LMTIU8mXNRO+Wyl5NzLGpPfpOh ZIECxdmjv3+6RtvRy99sJXYAmD4ZOei0D8K2XM7+42CXj/AEwcPUcNxI6WtnjU/Vvkuv 1Tdbfe0WRLsleB8ZS0BZgUaAwGDTVefaSCNhOYAONuhnjFHqbFDwJUjZ5RKXwAYuCYB4 W4JjM0U0EgPQI0SZHBcDzQ+CoepOg8EdKW4XW3m/7yo3qeZb2564/5WuCB3G3jRUQoV8 WLgQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.181.74 with SMTP id du10mr37541102lbc.40.1407779583374; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 10:53:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.147.168 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Aug 2014 10:53:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 13:53:03 -0400 Message-ID: From: Kathleen Moriarty To: Abdussalam Baryun Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c36fe4fd3d0205005e3994 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/DSfqguaP8Sbg18fzkHmsHMgteCc Cc: "adrian@olddog.co.uk" , S Moonesamy , "diversity@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Diversity] IETF General Area related to IETF diversity future X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 17:53:09 -0000 --001a11c36fe4fd3d0205005e3994 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi AB, On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 3:36 AM, Abdussalam Baryun < abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Adrian > > I think there is huge difference in forming WG for General work and > forming WG for specific Internet_engineering work. The biggest problem is > that general area is empty with many old participants having reasons not to > have one. I first need to know why there is no interest and why do we still > have the area open while empty (the area should close as well if no > interest any more). > > On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote: > >> I think this thread has digressed a long way from the purpose of this >> list and may be causing unnecessary distraction. >> >> Who decided the purpose for this list? I think it is about diversity, and > that the general area is mostly rolled by One region's old participants > and by current IETF management. > The chairs are the moderators and help to keep topics on track so that it is a good use of the participants time. When discussions are not on topic, lots of time is wasted, even if it is just to read the email threads and not engage. As one of the moderators, I agree with Adrian's assessment and will respond below to explain. > >> >> Forming a WG in the General Area is no different from forming a WG in any >> other area. >> >> I think it seems similar because a WG is a WG. It is like the discussion > on gender, so a man is no different than a woman, still we need diversity > because the majority made some perception differences. So WGs are > similar but the difference is the goals which are not similar related to > internet technology and that participants perceive them differently. > General area is related to issues of IETF administration, procedure, and > powers. Therefore, who calls for such WG will be mostly facing the big > people or one type of community (mostly male, higher positions, etc). > You are both in agreement, there was no need for follow up to Adrian's point. Short and to the point messages with enough context are more likely to be viewed positively by others in diverse communities (or any other) as the readers time is respected. This is a practice that will promote inclusivity. > It does not happen by wishing or stating that one should be formed. It >> happens when a need is demonstrated for a forum to do collective work >> toward a specific deliverable. >> >> IMHO It happens when there are connections with/between management, then > the need demonstrated ... > What Adrian meant here was that you would have to show a need for a WG and demonstrate that there is interest. The Diversity work was not done in a WG, but rather a design team. > >> >> To drive that (if you want to) you need to: >> >> - identify the topic you think needs a working group >> >> - write an internet-Draft describing the problem space >> >> - gather a group of people who agree with you >> >> - request a BoF or the immediate formation of a working group >> >> >> >> Can we please return this list to the intended topic, viz. >> >> I can do that request only if I get an answer that the community > confirms/confirmed that it does/did want the area empty from any WG. I see > that empty general area means that IETF is not having the future of full > diversity advantages. > I don't see a big push for a WG in the General Area that would somehow improve the Internet right now. The General Area does have the Gen-ART team, which you may or may not be aware of. This team review drafts in the IETF last call process, helping to catch issues with the draft prior to publication. The General area does help with diversity already as it sometimes corrects grammar issues and catches the use of colloquialisms as well as other identified issues to assist with inclusivity for the reader. If you think another WG is needed, please follow the steps Adrian outlined and start a new thread to see if there is interest. Proposals that get more traction are well developed and to the point in order to get support on a topic that is of interest to a group of participants. You may want to think it through before proposing anything and spend time developing a vision you think others would support and collaborate with you on. This thread is not helpful anymore as we have exhausted all of the points to be made already. Regards, Kathleen > > AB > > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > > -- Best regards, Kathleen --001a11c36fe4fd3d0205005e3994 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi AB,


On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 3:36 AM, Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Adrian
=C2=A0
I think there is huge=C2=A0difference in forming=C2=A0WG=C2=A0for Gene= ral=C2=A0work and forming=C2=A0WG for=C2=A0specific Internet_engineering wo= rk. The biggest problem is that general area is empty with many old partici= pants having reasons not to have one. I first need to know why there is no = interest and why do we still have the area open while empty (the area=C2=A0= should close as well if no interest any more).=C2=A0

On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> wrote:

I think this thread has digress= ed a long way from the purpose of this list and may be causing unnecessary = distraction.

Who decided = the purpose for this list? I think it is about diversity, and that the=C2= =A0general area is mostly rolled by One region's=C2=A0old participants = and=C2=A0by current=C2=A0IETF=C2=A0management.=C2=A0

The chairs are the moderators and he= lp to keep topics on track so that it is a good use of the participants tim= e. =C2=A0When discussions are not on topic, lots of time is wasted, even if= it is just to read the email threads and not engage. =C2=A0As one of the m= oderators, I agree with Adrian's assessment and will respond below to e= xplain.=C2=A0

=C2=A0

Forming a WG in the General Are= a is no different from forming a WG in any other area.=C2=A0

I think= it seems similar because a WG is a WG. It is like the discussion on gender= , so a man is no different than a woman, still we need diversity because th= e=C2=A0majority made some perception differences. So WGs are similar=C2=A0b= ut the difference is the goals which=C2=A0are not similar related to intern= et technology and that participants perceive them differently. General area= is related to issues of IETF=C2=A0administration, procedure,=C2=A0=C2=A0an= d powers. Therefore, who calls for such WG will be mostly facing the big pe= ople or one type of community (mostly male, higher positions, etc).=C2=A0

You are both in agreement, there was= no need for follow up to Adrian's point. =C2=A0Short and to the point = messages with enough context are more likely to be viewed positively by oth= ers in diverse communities (or any other) as the readers time is respected.= =C2=A0This is a practice that will promote inclusivity.
=C2=A0

It does not happen by wishing or stating that one should be= formed. It happens when a need is demonstrated for a forum to do collectiv= e work toward a specific deliverable.

IMHO=C2=A0It= happens when there are connections with/between=C2=A0management, then the = need demonstrated ...=C2=A0

What Adrian me= ant here was that you would have to show a need for a WG and demonstrate th= at there is interest. =C2=A0The Diversity work was not done in a WG, but ra= ther a design team.=C2=A0
=

=C2=A0

To drive that (if you want to) = you need to:

- identify the topic you think = needs a working group

- write an internet-Draft descr= ibing the problem space

- gather a group of people who = agree with you

- request a BoF or the immediat= e formation of a working group

=C2=A0

Can we please return this list = to the intended topic, viz.

=

=C2=A0I can do that request=C2=A0only i= f I get an answer that the community confirms/confirmed=C2=A0that it does/d= id=C2=A0want the area empty from any WG. I see that empty general area mean= s that IETF is not having the=C2=A0future of full diversity advantages.=C2= =A0

I don't see a big push for a WG = in the General Area that would somehow improve the Internet right now. =C2= =A0The General Area does have the Gen-ART team, which you may or may not be= aware of. =C2=A0This team review drafts in the IETF last call process, hel= ping to catch issues with the draft prior to publication. =C2=A0The General= area does help with diversity already as it sometimes corrects grammar iss= ues and catches the use of colloquialisms as well as other identified issue= s to assist with inclusivity for the reader.

If you think another WG is needed, please follow the st= eps Adrian outlined and start a new thread to see if there is interest. =C2= =A0Proposals that get more traction are well developed and to the point in = order to get support on a topic that is of interest to a group of participa= nts. =C2=A0You may want to think it through before proposing anything and s= pend time developing a vision you think others would support and collaborat= e with you on. =C2=A0This thread is not helpful anymore as we have exhauste= d all of the points to be made already. =C2=A0

Regards,
Kathleen =C2=A0

AB

_______________________________________________
diversity mailing list
diversity@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity




--

Best regards,
Kathleen
--001a11c36fe4fd3d0205005e3994-- From nobody Wed Aug 13 02:46:57 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AF641A86EC for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 02:46:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 bT7m5fHQsLn2 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 02:46:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yk0-x22f.google.com (mail-yk0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::22f]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C16C1A86EB for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 02:46:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yk0-f175.google.com with SMTP id q200so8095779ykb.20 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 02:46:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=PJtUrOhJk9f6pdM6BUFz0AnXwjlnM3iQa+NFqN4NP5A=; b=I/WTTrzCMSTA4JjihTvXlnoF1hJzs6vIoO/y4YjM4Nu1N7rf1940OPTlqmXlS9IvW7 LYHMVw0PUpT0y00ahPKUd+FE4ipba6RzQapBrCjMKOIuC0KAtw9IdlWtZG1DowlSFE0T Nlojle6a5d4Oz2wE3YgKg+tdpFj4Ceg5kb802WZ1fLt+KkN1gcDF0co4HPXI2jPGBxde +u1fqSZlUm1Znfytg1qwxFllBHjgPFawMbF5WWtdMzFOtHQX/N7tSC9PAtOv95AJWKrB lLfilFcfgy67Nfww8cFRUGZT7fMiwGmGXBhUuIBTwUWuyy5g+2yBOia/92PBfy32V9Jl r3sQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.135.212 with SMTP id u60mr5496098yhi.118.1407923212494; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 02:46:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.44.216 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 02:46:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 11:46:52 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: Kathleen Moriarty Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf301af867f3b01105007faa97 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/azew8Ho-70fWtU4tr1thKcbmqSU Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Diversity] IETF General Area related to IETF diversity future X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 09:46:55 -0000 --20cf301af867f3b01105007faa97 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi Kathleen, Thanks for your advise and comments. I thought the thread is helpful for remote participant and new participant. IMHO Any input in IETF can be helpful for someone and not helpful for another in the same time, overall it should be related to IETF. I remember a question from one new comer in IETF 89 meeting trainings, she asked how an area is formed by procedure, the answer was interesting as not much procedure available. I don't agree to follow the steps of forming a WG in general area similar to the other areas. It is pointless for me, because there are already hidden groups within this area not only in IETF but in any organisation in the world. IMHO the area should be closed as long the community has no representation as one WG. Is it normal by procedure to have an area without a WG? Or to have no community group for the area that is related to procedure and management issues of IETF? The ADs are alone doing all the work for the area without a known WG, that MUST be changed in my opinion, so I discuss it before preparing drafts in future. Best regards, > AB On Monday, August 11, 2014, Kathleen Moriarty wrote: > Hi AB, > > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 3:36 AM, Abdussalam Baryun < > abdussalambaryun@gmail.com > > wrote: > >> Hi Adrian >> >> I think there is huge difference in forming WG for General work and >> forming WG for specific Internet_engineering work. The biggest problem is >> that general area is empty with many old participants having reasons not to >> have one. I first need to know why there is no interest and why do we still >> have the area open while empty (the area should close as well if no >> interest any more). >> >> On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Adrian Farrel >> wrote: >> >>> I think this thread has digressed a long way from the purpose of this >>> list and may be causing unnecessary distraction. >>> >>> Who decided the purpose for this list? I think it is about diversity, >> and that the general area is mostly rolled by One region's old participants >> and by current IETF management. >> > > The chairs are the moderators and help to keep topics on track so that it > is a good use of the participants time. When discussions are not on topic, > lots of time is wasted, even if it is just to read the email threads and > not engage. As one of the moderators, I agree with Adrian's assessment and > will respond below to explain. > >> >>> >>> Forming a WG in the General Area is no different from forming a WG in >>> any other area. >>> >>> I think it seems similar because a WG is a WG. It is like the discussion >> on gender, so a man is no different than a woman, still we need diversity >> because the majority made some perception differences. So WGs are >> similar but the difference is the goals which are not similar related to >> internet technology and that participants perceive them differently. >> General area is related to issues of IETF administration, procedure, and >> powers. Therefore, who calls for such WG will be mostly facing the big >> people or one type of community (mostly male, higher positions, etc). >> > > You are both in agreement, there was no need for follow up to Adrian's > point. Short and to the point messages with enough context are more likely > to be viewed positively by others in diverse communities (or any other) as > the readers time is respected. This is a practice that will promote > inclusivity. > > >> It does not happen by wishing or stating that one should be formed. It >>> happens when a need is demonstrated for a forum to do collective work >>> toward a specific deliverable. >>> >>> IMHO It happens when there are connections with/between management, then >> the need demonstrated ... >> > > What Adrian meant here was that you would have to show a need for a WG and > demonstrate that there is interest. The Diversity work was not done in a > WG, but rather a design team. > >> >>> >>> To drive that (if you want to) you need to: >>> >>> - identify the topic you think needs a working group >>> >>> - write an internet-Draft describing the problem space >>> >>> - gather a group of people who agree with you >>> >>> - request a BoF or the immediate formation of a working group >>> >>> >>> >>> Can we please return this list to the intended topic, viz. >>> >>> I can do that request only if I get an answer that the community >> confirms/confirmed that it does/did want the area empty from any WG. I see >> that empty general area means that IETF is not having the future of full >> diversity advantages. >> > > I don't see a big push for a WG in the General Area that would somehow > improve the Internet right now. The General Area does have the Gen-ART > team, which you may or may not be aware of. This team review drafts in the > IETF last call process, helping to catch issues with the draft prior to > publication. The General area does help with diversity already as it > sometimes corrects grammar issues and catches the use of colloquialisms as > well as other identified issues to assist with inclusivity for the reader. > > If you think another WG is needed, please follow the steps Adrian outlined > and start a new thread to see if there is interest. Proposals that get > more traction are well developed and to the point in order to get support > on a topic that is of interest to a group of participants. You may want to > think it through before proposing anything and spend time developing a > vision you think others would support and collaborate with you on. This > thread is not helpful anymore as we have exhausted all of the points to be > made already. > > Regards, > Kathleen > >> >> AB >> >> _______________________________________________ >> diversity mailing list >> diversity@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity >> >> > > > -- > > Best regards, > Kathleen > --20cf301af867f3b01105007faa97 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Kathleen,

Thanks for your advise and comments.=C2=A0I thought=C2=A0the threa= d is helpful for remote participant and new participant. IMHO=C2=A0Any inpu= t in IETF can be helpful for someone and not helpful for another in the sam= e time, overall it should be related to IETF.=C2=A0I remember a question fr= om one new comer in IETF 89 meeting trainings,=C2=A0she asked how an area i= s formed by procedure,=C2=A0the answer was interesting as not much procedur= e available.=C2=A0I=C2=A0don't agree to follow the steps of forming a= =C2=A0WG in general area similar to the other areas. It is pointless for me= , because there are already hidden groups within this area not only in IETF= but in any organisation in the world.=C2=A0

=
IMHO the area should be closed as long the community has no representatio= n as one WG. Is it normal by procedure to have an area without a=C2=A0WG? O= r to=C2=A0have no community group=C2=A0for the area that is related to proc= edure and=C2=A0management issues=C2=A0of IETF? The ADs are alone=C2=A0doing= all the work for the area without a known=C2=A0WG, that MUST be changed in= my opinion, so I discuss it before preparing=C2=A0drafts in future.=C2=A0<= /span>

=
Best regards,
<= font>
AB


On Monday, August 11, 2014, Kathleen Moriarty wro= te:
Hi AB,


On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 3:36 AM, Abdussa= lam Baryun <abdussalamba= ryun@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Adrian
=C2=A0
I think there is huge=C2=A0difference in forming=C2=A0WG=C2=A0for Gene= ral=C2=A0work and forming=C2=A0WG for=C2=A0specific Internet_engineering wo= rk. The biggest problem is that general area is empty with many old partici= pants having reasons not to have one. I first need to know why there is no = interest and why do we still have the area open while empty (the area=C2=A0= should close as well if no interest any more).=C2=A0

On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 2:13 PM, Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> wrote:

I think this thread has digress= ed a long way from the purpose of this list and may be causing unnecessary = distraction.

Who decided = the purpose for this list? I think it is about diversity, and that the=C2= =A0general area is mostly rolled by One region's=C2=A0old participants = and=C2=A0by current=C2=A0IETF=C2=A0management.=C2=A0

The chairs are the moderators and he= lp to keep topics on track so that it is a good use of the participants tim= e. =C2=A0When discussions are not on topic, lots of time is wasted, even if= it is just to read the email threads and not engage. =C2=A0As one of the m= oderators, I agree with Adrian's assessment and will respond below to e= xplain.=C2=A0

=C2=A0

Forming a WG in the General Are= a is no different from forming a WG in any other area.=C2=A0

I think= it seems similar because a WG is a WG. It is like the discussion on gender= , so a man is no different than a woman, still we need diversity because th= e=C2=A0majority made some perception differences. So WGs are similar=C2=A0b= ut the difference is the goals which=C2=A0are not similar related to intern= et technology and that participants perceive them differently. General area= is related to issues of IETF=C2=A0administration, procedure,=C2=A0=C2=A0an= d powers. Therefore, who calls for such WG will be mostly facing the big pe= ople or one type of community (mostly male, higher positions, etc).=C2=A0

You are both in agreement, there was= no need for follow up to Adrian's point. =C2=A0Short and to the point = messages with enough context are more likely to be viewed positively by oth= ers in diverse communities (or any other) as the readers time is respected.= =C2=A0This is a practice that will promote inclusivity.
=C2=A0

It does not happen by wishing or stating that one should be= formed. It happens when a need is demonstrated for a forum to do collectiv= e work toward a specific deliverable.

IMHO=C2=A0It= happens when there are connections with/between=C2=A0management, then the = need demonstrated ...=C2=A0

What Adrian me= ant here was that you would have to show a need for a WG and demonstrate th= at there is interest. =C2=A0The Diversity work was not done in a WG, but ra= ther a design team.=C2=A0
=

=C2=A0

To drive that (if you want to) = you need to:

- identify the topic you think = needs a working group

- write an internet-Draft descr= ibing the problem space

- gather a group of people who = agree with you

- request a BoF or the immediat= e formation of a working group

=C2=A0

Can we please return this list = to the intended topic, viz.

=

=C2=A0I can do that request=C2=A0only i= f I get an answer that the community confirms/confirmed=C2=A0that it does/d= id=C2=A0want the area empty from any WG. I see that empty general area mean= s that IETF is not having the=C2=A0future of full diversity advantages.=C2= =A0

I don't see a big push for a WG = in the General Area that would somehow improve the Internet right now. =C2= =A0The General Area does have the Gen-ART team, which you may or may not be= aware of. =C2=A0This team review drafts in the IETF last call process, hel= ping to catch issues with the draft prior to publication. =C2=A0The General= area does help with diversity already as it sometimes corrects grammar iss= ues and catches the use of colloquialisms as well as other identified issue= s to assist with inclusivity for the reader.

If you think another WG is needed, please follow the st= eps Adrian outlined and start a new thread to see if there is interest. =C2= =A0Proposals that get more traction are well developed and to the point in = order to get support on a topic that is of interest to a group of participa= nts. =C2=A0You may want to think it through before proposing anything and s= pend time developing a vision you think others would support and collaborat= e with you on. =C2=A0This thread is not helpful anymore as we have exhauste= d all of the points to be made already. =C2=A0

Regards,
Kathleen =C2=A0
<= /span>

AB

_______________________________________________
diversity mailing list
diversity@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity




--

Best regards,
Kathleen
--20cf301af867f3b01105007faa97-- From nobody Wed Aug 13 06:43:36 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F6241A019C for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 06:43:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.268 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.268 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668] autolearn=ham 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 XEgBGSsnhvWl for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 06:43:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C74491A0199 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 06:43:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sm-THINK.elandsys.com ([12.217.29.89]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s7DDhPYN012925 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 06:43:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1407937412; x=1408023812; bh=vdJgKXi9XP/ax7QHrXi+nNFrPOH6QG26TJn0IIWew5o=; h=Date:To:From:Subject; b=0dgtmOmOFCvX+88sHiTyuKk+q51wgYqypKUsNMHOz14agWOGpnajA6tgWpZiiy0Gc gldA0maswX7j5foPzU0xrc7kW5daS33UBs2DWpOWQwhn75HKLOi6v+PB7WhUcqSFOI DqCOVE53D9Y9/43OLALOVOn62NuhxSTNm5B9KxJ0= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1407937412; x=1408023812; i=@elandsys.com; bh=vdJgKXi9XP/ax7QHrXi+nNFrPOH6QG26TJn0IIWew5o=; h=Date:To:From:Subject; b=iBuZJ6eqH0eubdCoGn6qxndBABLfnHId/Y6CPg/gOOb0VgKoywIS/hJ/YGrHxBA24 ZBLmLVMf6kzZWY1WH8Mtsz5MB7GsvfuV/zXw+63ek2T21rQDZUpBeJc6FTJKv20NaJ tCMBG8zqEgrQz9Ve8NpwyrAGEkk9rPLowPQmLX9o= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20140813063030.0b469270@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 06:41:23 -0700 To: diversity@ietf.org From: S Moonesamy Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/y9dV8lQGtsE3oX2aPtx4OSi-Dw0 Subject: [Diversity] Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 13:43:34 -0000 Hello, There were the following questions in USA Today (print edition): - Why is it important for the IETF [1] to me more diverse? - Have the numbers improved since you've been at the IETF [2]? - Do you have goals and timetables for diversity? Regards, S. Moonesamy 1. I replaced "technology industry" with IETF. 2. The original question was about Facebook. From nobody Wed Aug 13 11:56:08 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7CCE1A0362 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 11:56:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.168 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.168 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668] autolearn=ham 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 xxntxBEsehjJ for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 11:56:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gds.best.vwh.net (gds.best.vwh.net [192.220.66.135]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D91D51A0361 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 11:56:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 2587 invoked by uid 17031); 13 Aug 2014 18:56:04 -0000 Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 18:56:04 +0000 From: Greg Skinner To: S Moonesamy Message-ID: <20140813185604.A92025@gds.best.vwh.net> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140813063030.0b469270@elandnews.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20140813063030.0b469270@elandnews.com>; from sm+ietf@elandsys.com on Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 06:41:23AM -0700 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/soMu72WqkqACfmyuCfAwKe7tjKY Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 18:56:07 -0000 For what it's worth, today's online edition of USA Today features an article on this subject: http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/columnist/2014/08/13/analysis-tech-boards-should-bear-some-responsibility-for-diversity-woes/13459625/ As this pertains to the IETF, in my opinion, the IETF is competing with other activities that have a great deal of appeal, and can fulfill short-term gratification, such as code jams, hackathons, etc. In comparison, reviewing technical drafts requires a much steeper learning curve. Also, it's not perceived to be as much fun because it's not interactive like a social or mobile app. --gregbo On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 06:41:23AM -0700, S Moonesamy wrote: > Hello, > > There were the following questions in USA Today (print edition): > > - Why is it important for the IETF [1] to me more diverse? > > - Have the numbers improved since you've been at the IETF [2]? > > - Do you have goals and timetables for diversity? > > Regards, > S. Moonesamy > > 1. I replaced "technology industry" with IETF. > 2. The original question was about Facebook. > > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > From nobody Wed Aug 13 23:47:54 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B0B71A08D4 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 23:47:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 nUPDMe-2aBP0 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 23:47:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yk0-x234.google.com (mail-yk0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::234]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B1EC1A0895 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 23:47:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yk0-f180.google.com with SMTP id 200so671473ykr.11 for ; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 23:47:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=iDcwvK4vRg/MHYv2dnooEo5lz/OV9L4NKhSEgO+tFJc=; b=Pz5LxfFNxstT91OG8d8aRQwsbfmBklko2BkpMWxIFRX8vA/ICWjErP2JU+ZJ4nfW/b BTiR4IYlJFJqm3/7KK8I6tTYvRVE2SJpnASOj3jZ0lwNzDhzTY+gII1Csla+zUf89oas h9Ms+hud/162oCJJOupS0GW29aUDXbTspgVklDEuU3aad5fU7y6L8HcusJ9BAykRmjdQ UbPHrcgh17z35ss6UuDfMQX1Oght9kIJ22HI6u/nCfjXazYNaHGzm46BWV1Z/SzgL6GA VaN3BXObp77DJEVYdp1xFTbvFm61TPsxPrRmyhNwx1I9E+6VVpOWyU49jy0hVoJqxySF aBoQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.38.71 with SMTP id z47mr14952470yha.18.1407998864744; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 23:47:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.44.216 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Aug 2014 23:47:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20140813063030.0b469270@elandnews.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140813063030.0b469270@elandnews.com> Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 08:47:44 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: S Moonesamy Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bf0d9322d69c905009148d2 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/QJS_o8fEuFr5j-Hdd2BbfsTawjw Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" Subject: [Diversity] Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 06:47:51 -0000 --047d7bf0d9322d69c905009148d2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Mainly More academic participants are recommended for IETF. As I agree that IETF becomes more directed by industry and less by users (users include industry and academy) from time to time. On Wednesday, August 13, 2014, S Moonesamy wrote: > Hello, > > There were the following questions in USA Today (print edition): > > - Why is it important for the IETF [1] to me more diverse? Diverse in all its areas. The future is for diverse technology business or diverse economy. All standard organisations are having big competition while technology is getting more complicated and integrated in relation with the users/markets/industry that are globalised. > - Have the numbers improved since you've been at the IETF [2]? Yes, I think so but can be seen as slow, we may have loosing participants also because the number of participants are not increasing. IMHO on average the speed is may be 2 per WG per year and 20 per year per IETF. > - Do you have goals and timetables for diversity? You mean does IETF have that. No, the IETF is now waiting for the DT to do some work, there is still no WG for this for IETF to have goals and real progress in this diversity issue. For my personal effort for IETF diversity, I think the goal is to convince influencers/private-groups to not block forming a WG for the diversity problem, then we can discuss other related to the WG. If I was more available in IETF meetings I will work for that but still not available only remotely. IMHO in any field/area the DT has low performance if the WG does not exist. AB > > Regards, > S. Moonesamy > > 1. I replaced "technology industry" with IETF. > 2. The original question was about Facebook. > > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > --047d7bf0d9322d69c905009148d2 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mainly=C2=A0More academic participants are recommended for IETF. As I agree= that IETF=C2=A0becomes more directed by industry and less by users (users = include industry and academy) from time to time.=C2=A0

On Wednesday,= August 13, 2014, S Moonesamy wrote:
Hello,

There were the following questions in USA Today (print edition):

=C2=A0 - Why is it important for the IETF [1] to me more diverse?

Diverse in all its areas.=C2=A0The future is for div= erse technology business=C2=A0or diverse economy. All=C2=A0standard organis= ations are having big competition while technology is getting more complica= ted and integrated in relation with the users/markets/industry=C2=A0that ar= e globalised.=C2=A0


=C2=A0 - Have the numbers improved since you've been at the IETF [2]?

Yes, I think so but can be seen as slow, we = may have loosing participants also because the number of participants are n= ot increasing. IMHO on average=C2=A0the speed is may be 2 per WG per year a= nd 20 per=C2=A0year per IETF.=C2=A0


=C2=A0 - Do you have goals and timetables for diversity?
<= br>
You mean does IETF have that. No, the IETF is now waiting for= the DT to do some work, there is still no WG for this for IETF to=C2=A0hav= e goals and real progress in this diversity issue.=C2=A0

For my personal effort for IETF diversity, I think the = goal is to convince influencers/private-groups=C2=A0to not block=C2=A0formi= ng=C2=A0a WG for the diversity problem, then we can discuss other related t= o the=C2=A0WG. If I was more available in IETF meetings I will work for tha= t but still not available only remotely.=C2=A0IMHO in any field/area=C2=A0t= he DT has low performance if the WG does not exist.=C2=A0

AB
=C2=A0

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

1. I replaced "technology industry" with IETF.
2. The original question was about Facebook.

_______________________________________________
diversity mailing list
diversity@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
--047d7bf0d9322d69c905009148d2-- From nobody Thu Aug 14 05:00:52 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 268321A08ED for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 05:00:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 z4kV0oCUY-0E for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 05:00:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-x233.google.com (mail-lb0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F7271A0AB6 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 05:00:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lb0-f179.google.com with SMTP id v6so877071lbi.24 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 05:00:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=pthFQrwH9PGbWVXFJOZZM6XO1lzzSNj2NYHJY2uYewI=; b=q7+nirlO9fxwANejIMP2EI60p8DRy3tFbO/v7vCxCDaFL+zTsNCpkJBD9i5/7vMOSC alMZ9RtNqzeOBrdcfQnbMui74eYbZlKWplUKnPpz58JnfAl5Ru8UjP07TLepPUqJtKjp 2OeP2/EdNeHU2RXHA95Pn+FsuEZnCumvHxQbjslLsOM013D8uv924RII7k1ps0KK1/IU y4J14hiwv0ofBhuZtNsMbm9ULies8AhTTrrRv2Ph9xtCs+vKOAct7Af17usCLSKpabD9 n7Ssd7nKGGZ71nGcg0TeHzjYI2QOnSd7eJvz9snD8bdqDhMnwr/0cM4ojaGHc28sU+Gc IBNg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.245.171 with SMTP id xp11mr4699101lac.61.1408017640845; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 05:00:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.147.168 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 05:00:40 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140813185604.A92025@gds.best.vwh.net> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140813063030.0b469270@elandnews.com> <20140813185604.A92025@gds.best.vwh.net> Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 08:00:40 -0400 Message-ID: From: Kathleen Moriarty To: Greg Skinner Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11345e1251f6d3050095a75f Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/46-kwLSRArCzy2h8B3j0dAK-xmU Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , S Moonesamy Subject: Re: [Diversity] Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 12:00:50 -0000 --001a11345e1251f6d3050095a75f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Thanks for posting the article, Greg! While the Noncom did a great job last year, we'll all have to make sure the trend to be inclusive and promote diversity continues. Hopefully, through the nominating process, we'll get a good group of diverse candidate to chose from (hint: nominate them!). Mentoring may be key here too. If you are not aware, the Noncom changed their review process last year to include a blind part of the process. This required the candidates to fill out part of the questionnaires in a way that they could not be identified for more equal footing in the start of the selection process. The continued conversations on the topic of diversity will hopefully lead to more ideas and actions that spur from the work. We clearly need to continue making (and maintaining) progress. Many are making efforts to identify folks to be mentored to move into IETF leadership roles, but we may not know all of the good candidates. Hopefully, the mentor program can help people interested get themselves known or others will help to identify them. The mentor program, the fellows program, and policy leader programs are also intended to increase diversity. Are there ideas for other programs that should be started? Is there some aspect of the existing ones that can be improved? On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 2:56 PM, Greg Skinner wrote: > For what it's worth, today's online edition of USA Today features an > article on this subject: > > > http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/columnist/2014/08/13/analysis-tech-boards-should-bear-some-responsibility-for-diversity-woes/13459625/ > > As this pertains to the IETF, in my opinion, the IETF is competing > with other activities that have a great deal of appeal, and can > fulfill short-term gratification, such as code jams, hackathons, etc. > In comparison, reviewing technical drafts requires a much steeper > learning curve. Also, it's not perceived to be as much fun because > it's not interactive like a social or mobile app. > > --gregbo > > On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 06:41:23AM -0700, S Moonesamy wrote: > > Hello, > > > > There were the following questions in USA Today (print edition): > > > > - Why is it important for the IETF [1] to me more diverse? > > > > - Have the numbers improved since you've been at the IETF [2]? > > > > - Do you have goals and timetables for diversity? > > > > Regards, > > S. Moonesamy > > > > 1. I replaced "technology industry" with IETF. > > 2. The original question was about Facebook. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > diversity mailing list > > diversity@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > > > > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > -- Best regards, Kathleen --001a11345e1251f6d3050095a75f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Thanks for posting the article, Greg!

W= hile the Noncom did a great job last year, we'll all have to make sure = the trend to be inclusive and promote diversity continues. =C2=A0Hopefully,= through the nominating process, we'll get a good group of diverse cand= idate to chose from (hint: nominate them!). =C2=A0Mentoring may be key here= too. =C2=A0If you are not aware, the Noncom changed their review process l= ast year to include a blind part of the process. =C2=A0This required the ca= ndidates to fill out part of the questionnaires in a way that they could no= t be identified for more equal footing in the start of the selection proces= s. =C2=A0The continued conversations on the topic of diversity will hopeful= ly lead to more ideas and actions that spur from the work. =C2=A0We clearly= need to continue making (and maintaining) progress.

Many are making efforts to identify folks to be mentore= d to move into IETF leadership roles, but we may not know all of the good c= andidates. =C2=A0Hopefully, the mentor program can help people interested g= et themselves known or others will help to identify them.

The mentor program, the fellows program, and policy lea= der programs are also intended to increase diversity. =C2=A0

=
Are there ideas for other programs that should be started? =C2= =A0Is there some aspect of the existing ones that can be improved?


On Wed,= Aug 13, 2014 at 2:56 PM, Greg Skinner <gds@gds.best.vwh.net> wrote:
For what it's worth, today's online = edition of USA Today features an
article on this subject:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/columnist/2014/08/13/a= nalysis-tech-boards-should-bear-some-responsibility-for-diversity-woes/1345= 9625/

As this pertains to the IETF, in my opinion, the IETF is competing
with other activities that have a great deal of appeal, and can
fulfill short-term gratification, such as code jams, hackathons, etc.
In comparison, reviewing technical drafts requires a much steeper
learning curve. =C2=A0Also, it's not perceived to be as much fun becaus= e
it's not interactive like a social or mobile app.

--gregbo

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 06:41:23AM -0700, S Moonesamy wrote:
> Hello,
>
> There were the following questions in USA Today (print edition):
>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0- Why is it important for the IETF [1] to me more diverse= ?
>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0- Have the numbers improved since you've been at the = IETF [2]?
>
> =C2=A0 =C2=A0- Do you have goals and timetables for diversity?
>
> Regards,
> S. Moonesamy
>
> 1. I replaced "technology industry" with IETF.
> 2. The original question was about Facebook.
>
> _______________________________________________
> diversity mailing list
> diversity@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
>

_______________________________________________
diversity mailing list
diversity@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity



--
=

Best regards,
Kathleen
--001a11345e1251f6d3050095a75f-- From nobody Thu Aug 14 11:07:53 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA4521A00E6 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 11:07:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.668 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.668 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668] autolearn=ham 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 5QUKEYPTG1-E for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 11:07:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA35D1A0248 for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2014 11:07:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sm-THINK.elandsys.com ([12.217.29.89]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s7EI7cHF010192 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 14 Aug 2014 11:07:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1408039665; x=1408126065; bh=QHMd9OblQKnyiym8+ErF+6KY/Zdq63NZfiMv2p1pYWA=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=3cQzWLpkpTwH2t1D4Eia1Bg1wrOnzQ277aeMfvhYpradul2bwAnj6+kMH/zfd/xCL Cx/lfDtwRrsl1hfz1bSq7Xn7UNGg/aZQxLLzYHtf8FRuklyO23u2jW+dEyQ80Wn1M+ xEeo+y9EluQGPKybxvXrkzUvWTZLH8JbaOFIlW8U= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1408039665; x=1408126065; i=@elandsys.com; bh=QHMd9OblQKnyiym8+ErF+6KY/Zdq63NZfiMv2p1pYWA=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=hLW0j8mPIM61pnbMwq1Yp37Az7d5YJr2kFvBurXoNfM992yICgZgCilDnOGnUpmVe +C6/CDjndsej+E9mGnzpBpN+ZTLlckE7Vhy/YB4oUQ/pKwXvw/hnWU6Y76pZaShCaK O7dlCvc4amUlg0DufLValSXR9SwsP/FinCzHTZ+g= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20140814103528.099fa148@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 11:06:48 -0700 To: Greg Skinner From: S Moonesamy In-Reply-To: <20140813185604.A92025@gds.best.vwh.net> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140813063030.0b469270@elandnews.com> <20140813185604.A92025@gds.best.vwh.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/uOPVZXbOAeUqFaxk8-ln7VQjw_w Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2014 18:07:52 -0000 Hi Greg, At 11:56 AM 8/13/2014, Greg Skinner wrote: >For what it's worth, today's online edition of USA Today features an >article on this subject: > >http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/columnist/2014/08/13/analysis-tech-boards-should-bear-some-responsibility-for-diversity-woes/13459625/ Thanks for the URL. >As this pertains to the IETF, in my opinion, the IETF is competing >with other activities that have a great deal of appeal, and can >fulfill short-term gratification, such as code jams, hackathons, etc. >In comparison, reviewing technical drafts requires a much steeper >learning curve. Also, it's not perceived to be as much fun because >it's not interactive like a social or mobile app. Short-term gratifications do not solve problems. I agree that there is a learning curve for reviewing technical drafts. There are some technical and non-technical aspects in performing a review. I (several persons helped me) looked into the matter some time back. It required a lot of effort to get results. It helps to factor in some IETF problems [1] and to assess whether there is progress. Regards, S. moonesamy 1. I cannot explain what they are. From nobody Fri Aug 15 03:19:27 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFC6D1A8A31 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 03:19:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 5X3IDU9soFiW for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 03:19:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yk0-x233.google.com (mail-yk0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9EC951A8A2E for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 03:19:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yk0-f179.google.com with SMTP id 142so1937021ykq.38 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 03:19:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=ByB/a3+rkHIo6YXYfltL4yLn6UGFB8m4TQMedSRkTjU=; b=bpZlIQlBFq3N43JoQ4t7QbdlOBuduV9gFSQzUzKFxJ3jJOq3vtyxjjKC2R4ehK0zPa 2zhHYH9Dt6yU4TXsozZbSE4S/PathSqdVdADNxkobL8ye/vvDdoTPdFG21qBFrd7LRWl vlgzsJCU1c9TSj0TL8TN84AQKekN/vR2Px3WSzEPfCA2JJbfeOkN5OsF4sAm10mUD5lB AiBOjsFUUDIRt2ToRvS+jW1DJdcFxm5mBK265PWdLUJs7Fh1GlOnwpODNpz/1xCIrLq/ wz+hmX6EeA4hMTLCtHgqR35iONsMz8TUZwVpyHTKdFnf2Q0j+5l8W9FvVM/5H41MvCaB YB5Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.7.197 with SMTP id 45mr25486276yhp.113.1408097961848; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 03:19:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.44.216 with HTTP; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 03:19:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140813185604.A92025@gds.best.vwh.net> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140813063030.0b469270@elandnews.com> <20140813185604.A92025@gds.best.vwh.net> Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 12:19:21 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: Greg Skinner Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c1d2b0d335c40500a85a13 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/ZMo4gryaj5hVY8MSZ8BSckUScmA Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , S Moonesamy Subject: Re: [Diversity] Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 10:19:25 -0000 --001a11c1d2b0d335c40500a85a13 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi Greg, Thanks for your input. On Wednesday, August 13, 2014, Greg Skinner wrote: > For what it's worth, today's online edition of USA Today features an > article on this subject: > > > http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/columnist/2014/08/13/analysis-tech-boards-should-bear-some-responsibility-for-diversity-woes/13459625/ > > I think that analysis is important and can be for IETF as well, and the most important that we need to solve it in IETF if it appears. Or we can do some analysis on the IETF management as google/Facebook done. > As this pertains to the IETF, in my opinion, the IETF is competing > with other activities that have a great deal of appeal, and can > fulfill short-term gratification, such as code jams, hackathons, etc. > In comparison, reviewing technical drafts requires a much steeper > learning curve. Also, it's not perceived to be as much fun because > it's not interactive like a social or mobile app. IETF community reviews is another problem which is not diverse, I have been reviewing some drafts and trying to interact with their authors but they respond only after my request messages to chairs/AD that authors should interact with reviewers. Many IETF editors need training to be responsive and accept diversity opinions/suggestions. An example: One WG editor has even refused to acknowledge my efforts and has been backed up with the WG AD as saying my efforts were not substantial (so I now may not review with harder efforts, they analysed reviewers' input, forgetting to target the draft not reviewers). When I complained to see what IESG thinks, they did not acknowledge, so I found IETF does not encourage diverse efforts. I think IETF effort to solve diversity is not substantial which will be needing long term. AB > --gregbo > > On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 06:41:23AM -0700, S Moonesamy wrote: > > Hello, > > > > There were the following questions in USA Today (print edition): > > > > - Why is it important for the IETF [1] to me more diverse? > > > > - Have the numbers improved since you've been at the IETF [2]? > > > > - Do you have goals and timetables for diversity? > > > > Regards, > > S. Moonesamy > > > > 1. I replaced "technology industry" with IETF. > > 2. The original question was about Facebook. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > diversity mailing list > > diversity@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > > > > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > --001a11c1d2b0d335c40500a85a13 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Greg,

Thanks for your input.=C2=A0

On Wednesda= y, August 13, 2014, Greg Skinner wrote:
= For what it's worth, today's online edition of USA Today features a= n
article on this subject:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/columnist/2014/08/13/a= nalysis-tech-boards-should-bear-some-responsibility-for-diversity-woes/1345= 9625/


I think that=C2=A0analysis=C2=A0=C2=A0= is important=C2=A0and can be for IETF as well, and the most important that= =C2=A0=C2=A0we need to solve it in IETF if it appears. Or we can do some an= alysis on=C2=A0the=C2=A0IETF management as google/Facebook done.=C2=A0
=C2=A0
As this pertains to the IETF, in my opinion, the IETF is competing
with other activities that have a great deal of appeal, and can
fulfill short-term gratification, such as code jams, hackathons, etc.
In comparison, reviewing technical drafts requires a much steeper
learning curve.=C2=A0 Also, it's not perceived to be as much fun becaus= e
it's not interactive like a social or mobile app.

=
IETF community=C2=A0reviews=C2=A0is another problem which is not= diverse, I have been reviewing some=C2=A0drafts=C2=A0and trying to interac= t with their=C2=A0authors but they respond only=C2=A0after my request=C2=A0= messages to chairs/AD that authors should interact with reviewers. Many IET= F editors need training to be responsive and accept diversity opinions/sugg= estions.=C2=A0

An example:=C2=A0One WG editor=C2=A0has even refused to= acknowledge my efforts and has been backed up with the WG=C2=A0AD as sayin= g my efforts were not substantial (so I now may not review with harder effo= rts, they analysed reviewers' input, forgetting to target the draft not= reviewers).=C2=A0When I complained to see what IESG thinks, they did not a= cknowledge, so=C2=A0I found IETF does not=C2=A0encourage diverse efforts.= =C2=A0I think IETF effort to solve diversity is not substantial which will = be=C2=A0needing long term.=C2=A0

AB


--gregbo

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 06:41:23AM -0700, S Moonesamy wrote:
> Hello,
>
> There were the following questions in USA Today (print edition):
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 - Why is it important for the IETF [1] to me more diverse= ?
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 - Have the numbers improved since you've been at the = IETF [2]?
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 - Do you have goals and timetables for diversity?
>
> Regards,
> S. Moonesamy
>
> 1. I replaced "technology industry" with IETF.
> 2. The original question was about Facebook.
>
> _______________________________________________
> diversity mailing list
> diversity@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
>

_______________________________________________
diversity mailing list
diversity@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
--001a11c1d2b0d335c40500a85a13-- From nobody Fri Aug 15 04:57:51 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 155C51A09DB for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 04:57:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham 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 Pa7AAffT_bok for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 04:57:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from out61-ams.mf.surf.net (out61-ams.mf.surf.net [145.0.1.61]) (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 3842C1A0989 for ; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 04:57:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from teletubbie.het.net.je (teletubbie.het.net.je [192.87.110.29]) by outgoing3-ams.mf.surf.net (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4) with ESMTP id s7FC0ZJc013630; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 14:00:35 +0200 Received: from 52d9613c.cm-11-1b.dynamic.ziggo.nl ([82.217.97.60] helo=[192.168.2.77]) by teletubbie.het.net.je with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1XIG6x-000FUg-SB; Fri, 15 Aug 2014 13:56:00 +0200 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-847C3C8B-C95D-422A-BBD9-73549E346B1F Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) From: Klaas Wierenga X-Mailer: iPad Mail (11D257) In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 13:56:00 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <3BD45ECE-DDF0-49DC-8EA2-EBC471801AAD@wierenga.net> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140813063030.0b469270@elandnews.com> <20140813185604.A92025@gds.best.vwh.net> To: Abdussalam Baryun X-Antivirus: no malware found X-Bayes-Prob: 0.0001 (Score 0, tokens from: p-out:default, p:default, base:default, @@RPTN) X-CanIt-Geo: ip=192.87.110.29; country=NL; latitude=52.5000; longitude=5.7500; http://maps.google.com/maps?q=52.5000,5.7500&z=6 X-CanItPRO-Stream: p-out:default (inherits from p:default,base:default) X-Canit-Stats-ID: 0bMD00z7a - d1e7dce79b17 - 20140815 (trained as not-spam) X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . roaringpenguin . com) Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/YrP9InsuIntSDN4NlIhhcFqnOK4 Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , Greg Skinner , S Moonesamy Subject: Re: [Diversity] Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2014 11:57:50 -0000 --Apple-Mail-847C3C8B-C95D-422A-BBD9-73549E346B1F Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable AB, [...] >=20 > An example: One WG editor has even refused to acknowledge my efforts and h= as been backed up with the WG AD as saying my efforts were not substantial (= so I now may not review with harder efforts, they analysed reviewers' input,= forgetting to target the draft not reviewers). When I complained to see wha= t IESG thinks, they did not acknowledge, so I found IETF does not encourage d= iverse efforts. I think IETF effort to solve diversity is not substantial wh= ich will be needing long term.=20 What gives you the idea that this is because of diversity reasons? I have lo= oked at that case, and as far as I can see (granted, I was not directly invo= lved) that didn't play a role. I think you should try to separate your perso= nal frustration that the IESG didn't agree with you from the larger issue of= diversity. Klaas >=20 > AB >=20 >>=20 >> --gregbo >>=20 >> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 06:41:23AM -0700, S Moonesamy wrote: >> > Hello, >> > >> > There were the following questions in USA Today (print edition): >> > >> > - Why is it important for the IETF [1] to me more diverse? >> > >> > - Have the numbers improved since you've been at the IETF [2]? >> > >> > - Do you have goals and timetables for diversity? >> > >> > Regards, >> > S. Moonesamy >> > >> > 1. I replaced "technology industry" with IETF. >> > 2. The original question was about Facebook. >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > diversity mailing list >> > diversity@ietf.org >> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity >> > >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> diversity mailing list >> diversity@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity --Apple-Mail-847C3C8B-C95D-422A-BBD9-73549E346B1F Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
AB,

[...]
=

An example= : One WG editor has even refused to acknowledge my efforts and has= been backed up with the WG AD as saying my efforts were not substantia= l (so I now may not review with harder efforts, they analysed reviewers' inp= ut, forgetting to target the draft not reviewers). When I complained to= see what IESG thinks, they did not acknowledge, so I found IETF does n= ot encourage diverse efforts. I think IETF effort to solve diversi= ty is not substantial which will be needing long term. 

What gives you the idea that this is beca= use of diversity reasons? I have looked at that case, and as far as I can se= e (granted, I was not directly involved) that didn't play a role. I think yo= u should try to separate your personal frustration that the IESG didn't agre= e with you from the larger issue of diversity.

Klaas


AB


--gregbo

On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 06:41:23AM -0700, S Moonesamy wrote:
> Hello,
>
> There were the following questions in USA Today (print edition):
>
>    - Why is it important for the IETF [1] to me more diverse?=
>
>    - Have the numbers improved since you've been at the IETF [= 2]?
>
>    - Do you have goals and timetables for diversity?
>
> Regards,
> S. Moonesamy
>
> 1. I replaced "technology industry" with IETF.
> 2. The original question was about Facebook.
>
> _______________________________________________
> diversity mailing list
> diversity@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
>

_______________________________________________
diversity mailing list
diversity@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
____________________= ___________________________
diversity mailing listdiversity@ietf.orghttps://= www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity
= --Apple-Mail-847C3C8B-C95D-422A-BBD9-73549E346B1F-- From nobody Sat Aug 16 03:37:03 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29FCE1A874A for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 03:37:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 n3O0S5JOZrti for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 03:36:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yk0-x231.google.com (mail-yk0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::231]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 75B091A874D for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 03:36:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yk0-f177.google.com with SMTP id 79so2880344ykr.36 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 03:36:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=i7hEABu0qpqwa4fLwUJLn4W8AposaM3QE40j4PHYSFo=; b=VXHAOFkZHrywn0uXTeNPT3Y7Ax+5ABCgKf8JTvAfWliP0xvk74RZ8cnmcfY7g+5KbG DVb9xRE3Kz20lVm15BVU0yUJvr9U2+ralXOJilp1F/pWxJuUuyPd3TmYEUhmxhxMijqr uTWinQ4ZyCoLV6zgyhHO3YMHu80fYzMO1/1qPsOqENApJXERBSoMSxKAfsrUdRAJcX7g WUCywZZu24qgcLpCLFebH+6PRFleWhcPpYAGzX4kblUqDWDMVcHW6WFcYuA9ZcJZTplL 9mj2lJREAna5GiaIKRIABwtU5nfV1ywt9rfeIh1dWbvELTZ3wK5DpKbR3Pf11iehyMeX AYiA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.8.103 with SMTP id 67mr35195960yhq.29.1408185416845; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 03:36:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.44.216 with HTTP; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 03:36:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <3BD45ECE-DDF0-49DC-8EA2-EBC471801AAD@wierenga.net> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140813063030.0b469270@elandnews.com> <20140813185604.A92025@gds.best.vwh.net> <3BD45ECE-DDF0-49DC-8EA2-EBC471801AAD@wierenga.net> Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 12:36:56 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: Klaas Wierenga Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/xNFKYy1RnrZOHFpqzlyf03EFiuo Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Diversity] Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 10:37:00 -0000 Klaas, My answers to the USA questions were posted from one country at North Africa and not from USA country (usually IETF has more USA participants and more meetings in America region).=C2=A0I think that=C2=A0m= any people=C2=A0enjoy volunteer work when They=C2=A0work with others=C2=A0that encourage/thank=C2=A0their volunteerings (because they the editors and the reviewers, all volunteer for IETF vision not for personal benefits/business). However, I just think that All=C2=A0Reviewers should enjoy=C2=A0working=C2=A0with IETF=C2=A0editors. Comments below, On Friday, August 15, 2014, Klaas Wierenga wrote: > > AB, > > [...] > >> >> An example:=C2=A0One WG editor=C2=A0has even refused to acknowledge my e= fforts and has been backed up with the WG=C2=A0AD as saying my efforts were= not substantial (so I now may not review with harder efforts, they analyse= d reviewers' input, forgetting to target the draft not reviewers).=C2=A0Whe= n I complained to see what IESG thinks, they did not acknowledge, so=C2=A0I= found IETF does not=C2=A0encourage diverse efforts.=C2=A0I think IETF effo= rt to solve diversity is not substantial which will be=C2=A0needing long te= rm. > > > What gives you the idea that this is because of diversity reasons? IMO that=C2=A0is=C2=A0because of lack of diversity in reviews of the=C2=A0I= ETF submitted=C2=A0works.=C2=A0If draft-editor=C2=A0distinguishes=C2=A0comments= =C2=A0per WGLC=C2=A0and only acknowledge substantial comments=C2=A0that may reduce=C2=A0future opportunity of diverse=C2=A0input per discussion-call (i.e, opportunity per point=C2=A0as=C2=A0more inputs after seeing one small input and makes peopl= e find a decision=C2=A0per point)=C2=A0even though we already have very low v= olume of reviews per adopted=C2=A0draft. Furthermore, in IETF some reviews are done privately and some in public, we want to encourage public reviews more than private because public reviews introduces diverse=C2=A0discussions/analysis within WG, but editors may not acknowledge a=C2=A0public review and acknowledge a private one. Public review is more difficult than private because that public-review can request more discussions by reviewer (as authors become responsible to respond=C2=A0because of their draft process=C2=A0and reviewers=C2=A0responsible to respond for their input). IMHO=C2=A0IETF need= s more comments and=C2=A0public reviews per LC.=C2=A0IETF=C2=A0RFCs need to n= ot ignore thanking small public=C2=A0efforts, RFCs should be sensitive to all efforts. > =C2=A0I have looked at that case, and as far as I can see (granted, I was= not directly involved) that didn't play a role. I think you should try to = separate your personal frustration that the IESG didn't agree with you from= the larger issue of diversity. I accepted the decision with good relationship with all (did not enjoy working with some editors),=C2=A0but I thought it was not helping diversity in reviews, so I now am using the example.=C2=A0There are no frustrations by both sides (participant or management)=C2=A0just discussions for best future=C2=A0practices. We all may make wrong/right judgment but it is good to discuss different=C2=A0examples and point of views. Overall, IETF should collect the statistics/experiences for diversity analysis as google and facebook done to answer those questions correctly. Regards, AB From nobody Sat Aug 16 04:06:14 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F16A91A8756 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 04:06:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 lNVosbIa73XI for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 04:06:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yk0-x234.google.com (mail-yk0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::234]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48B5B1A874F for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 04:06:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yk0-f180.google.com with SMTP id 200so2877496ykr.25 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 04:06:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=3RnVYYv574rnVQJDc7WV6diBDxfNJfUFWzmyzUm6/to=; b=HGoY/2JptsRk7SbcYwIQkAKoM9slCSdmNomHq9wrrdVI7jrqK7rnHA7OuPNaMtIWym FFUDrFqp8/Pp4cZlAEhlCpbVYSZApSYCxYAaU+NGD4pZrFzweVM5iecoWc/gdLCkSZnc WB/oVWVxyV7xV1p0riRZbYTPvkc+0C6PDISdZSx8mkh7JFgr/A+cVAkmtWhr2dsj+8B4 TZVxoS1b6d4UFsvDDL9jp2T9d/xB0n69gtb9+O7M/QvFLqSM696aebSOizeZOyMeKf8g NPJsXRYwhACQYiwwo4TDrDpKbY2YRPqWrcigFY9lMPBGdao5uFJihwW/4SfUXfOm8B3M KFOA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.70.229 with SMTP id p65mr34678046yhd.50.1408187166582; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 04:06:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.44.216 with HTTP; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 04:06:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 13:06:06 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: Kathleen Moriarty Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/kVuOqKBwga1ICJokcOCrXmm04PI Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , Greg Skinner , S Moonesamy Subject: [Diversity] Community Programs for Diversity (was Re: Questions from USA Today) X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 11:06:11 -0000 Hi Kathleen, My answers and opinions (I may be wrong, so I am discussing to find with all of you the right solution or direction). IMHO, We need to make sure that those programs are open programs or programs with community awareness/review in the general area not only on this list. I think that even management need mentoring not only new comers, also I think the programs should be following one WG of diversity not following a DT nor an AD. However, I know those suggestions were not supported. On 8/14/14, Kathleen Moriarty wrote: > Thanks for posting the article, Greg! > (...) > > The mentor program, the fellows program, and policy leader programs are > also intended to increase diversity. > > Are there ideas for other programs that should be started? Is there some > aspect of the existing ones that can be improved? > The key issue I think in Greg's message is that staff/participants in an organisation should enjoy their work and their interaction. We need a reviewer-editor program to improve enjoyment of reviewing/editing or to make it fun to review and discuss draft's errors. Yes review is difficult but we can make it enjoyable for all so all will participate in such process with good quality. I know that there are experts in the same WG that don't have time to review but we need to make it fun for them to join it. We need to make sure that participants are not reviewing just to volunteer but also to have fun while doing that task of review. Best regards AB From nobody Sat Aug 16 09:41:51 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26E591A06D1 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 09:41:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.668 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.668 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668] autolearn=ham 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 Z8YDzWWJ-NTI for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 09:41:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25C051A06C8 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 09:41:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sm-THINK.elandsys.com ([12.217.29.89]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s7GGfRJD006522 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 16 Aug 2014 09:41:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1408207293; x=1408293693; bh=AIWwdXVggW96TKPbtuzUBB8XkeoQHTvKcsYvGG/jBw8=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=v68Ojx+fjuKKkelYGAVSCG3bfcIS8r0+zQ7oRrkddm/x5gAYkMYnhOzhYtsclpqP8 Ar6lLC8PK4f3aD7uL8gwAJpg+8IEG/JYpmvtrrMFYR4k8H9goVkhIIJZ1gbm4QoL7e vk2yQc4Pa3nDYQI6sOH2dCGiRNXPbZu0U6iYJTsM= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1408207293; x=1408293693; i=@elandsys.com; bh=AIWwdXVggW96TKPbtuzUBB8XkeoQHTvKcsYvGG/jBw8=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=EIEMzgtT9jwcOASsEIfyz98r/FyRllPdLLjPv8xA/kgucmT/YlGYlUVpl5xogG9d6 OyWBUQ+EclyhuiI7RK5Juz92I62uW9wlarm4Kbbo8QD/MHpQeE+e/6oruhGy+J+TX0 QG/Z/VChmttqJG7yQ5/aYAFeH8G6ckuewoeUjSTM= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20140816070156.0aa4a5a8@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 07:45:07 -0700 To: Abdussalam Baryun From: S Moonesamy In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140813063030.0b469270@elandnews.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/KUSz6u_iJw5V4Y7xC_GXKzP-qBE Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 16:41:49 -0000 Hi Abdussalam, At 11:47 PM 8/13/2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: >Yes, I think so but can be seen as slow, we may have loosing >participants also because the number of participants are not >increasing. IMHO on average the speed is may be 2 per WG per year >and 20 per year per IETF. The numbers have not improved in the Area which I usually participate in. A look at ietf@ietf.org mailing list might show whether the numbers have changed. Here's the list of participants from last week http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg89137.html There is one person from Africa. There isn't anyone from Latin America, China, Japan or Korea. >For my personal effort for IETF diversity, I think the goal is to >convince influencers/private-groups to not block forming a WG for >the diversity problem, then we can discuss other related to the WG. >If I was more available in IETF meetings I will work for that but >still not available only remotely. IMHO in any field/area the DT has >low performance if the WG does not exist. The difference between a team and a working group is the formality. There would have to be a problem statement for a working group to work on. I would not try to convince anyone to do something when the mailing list archive shows that there is very little interest in the questions (see subject line). Any effort without any goal and/or timetable is an effort without any results. Regards, S. Moonesamy From nobody Sat Aug 16 10:44:47 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 056361A005D for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 10:44:44 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 pHmqM0tKaK05 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 10:44:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lb0-x22d.google.com (mail-lb0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::22d]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 06BF21A0052 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 10:44:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lb0-f173.google.com with SMTP id u10so2890070lbd.32 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 10:44:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=VMEhEFkxb+6479TiFyoJwkGBDPtAoqngLrZq6XXR4M4=; b=dqZqiuATFKpZuPABJ7eKIllfVP5Zb6PEA6ds3nlfFS+Wrk6rWLHCg0fcWnpr1h9QFy Ws37ZQBQraCKqh1CjOuJ31DZ0kLm/mybFKNsE1I3tpO5Q6+PTh7f5fwC6vf/rWEVKrAh 8fFvs4r7Q2B902d3zSBFA8oui6Bzl/5QAOiK8Jwg+yVIZcKNi+6SqwNiNWLTDrfasbiN A8OER5OheplHBmutSVQa6A/6dXDlKQmFqmQOReDcR0WQUi+SitF1Qv0rO6TrEt6hcBcn lxAQVXn7OEEwTf/YoayjRg4psc1Jfyf6qAJF/SzAkxBEq1IS+Ccz01tRR0xxMfOkNA18 NhsQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.179.229 with SMTP id dj5mr2606532lac.97.1408211079211; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 10:44:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.64.170 with HTTP; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 10:44:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20140816070156.0aa4a5a8@elandnews.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140813063030.0b469270@elandnews.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20140816070156.0aa4a5a8@elandnews.com> Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 13:44:39 -0400 Message-ID: From: Kathleen Moriarty To: S Moonesamy Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1133a568252fde0500c2b16b Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/7FIpbiFPf4VcwfvIwJv_e-D-mZM Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , Abdussalam Baryun Subject: Re: [Diversity] Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 17:44:44 -0000 --001a1133a568252fde0500c2b16b Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 10:45 AM, S Moonesamy wrote: > Hi Abdussalam, > > At 11:47 PM 8/13/2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: > >> Yes, I think so but can be seen as slow, we may have loosing participants >> also because the number of participants are not increasing. IMHO on average >> the speed is may be 2 per WG per year and 20 per year per IETF. >> > > The numbers have not improved in the Area which I usually participate in. > A look at ietf@ietf.org mailing list might show whether the numbers have > changed. Here's the list of participants from last week > http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg89137.html There is > one person from Africa. There isn't anyone from Latin America, China, > Japan or Korea. > > > For my personal effort for IETF diversity, I think the goal is to >> convince influencers/private-groups to not block forming a WG for the >> diversity problem, then we can discuss other related to the WG. If I was >> more available in IETF meetings I will work for that but still not >> available only remotely. IMHO in any field/area the DT has low performance >> if the WG does not exist. >> > > The difference between a team and a working group is the formality. There > would have to be a problem statement for a working group to work on. I > would not try to convince anyone to do something when the mailing list > archive shows that there is very little interest in the questions (see > subject line). Any effort without any goal and/or timetable is an effort > without any results. > One of the main differences is that the design team identified a few projects and the projects split off from the design team and the diversity list to meet their objectives. Or the effort was spurred on by this push and was managed through the IAB or ISOC. Another example is the team developing CodeMatch. If it was a working group, it would be harder to manage all of the separate projects, but we are able to break off into smaller groups and accomplish things that should incrementally improve things. Best regards, Kathleen > > Regards, > S. Moonesamy > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > -- Best regards, Kathleen --001a1133a568252fde0500c2b16b Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 10:45 AM, S Moonesamy <= ;sm+ietf@elandsys= .com> wrote:
Hi Abdussalam,

At 11:47 PM 8/13/2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
Yes, I think so but can be seen as slow, we may have loosing participants a= lso because the number of participants are not increasing. IMHO on average = the speed is may be 2 per WG per year and 20 per year per IETF.

The numbers have not improved in the Area which I usually participate in.= =C2=A0 A look at ietf@ie= tf.org mailing list might show whether the numbers have changed.=C2=A0 = Here's the list of participants from last week http:= //www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg89137.html There is one person from Africa.=C2=A0 There isn't anyone from Latin = America, China, Japan or Korea.


For my personal effort for IETF diversity, I think the goal is to convince = influencers/private-groups to not block forming a WG for the diversity prob= lem, then we can discuss other related to the WG. If I was more available i= n IETF meetings I will work for that but still not available only remotely.= IMHO in any field/area the DT has low performance if the WG does not exist= .

The difference between a team and a working group is the formality.=C2=A0 T= here would have to be a problem statement for a working group to work on.= =C2=A0 I would not try to convince anyone to do something when the mailing = list archive shows that there is very little interest in the questions (see= subject line).=C2=A0 Any effort without any goal and/or timetable is an ef= fort without any results.


Best regards,
Kathleen

Regards,
S. Moonesamy
_______________________________________________
diversity mailing list
diversity@ietf.org<= /a>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity



--
=

Best regards,
Kathleen
--001a1133a568252fde0500c2b16b-- From nobody Sat Aug 16 10:50:30 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C070C1A0046 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 10:50:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 4Oa3agh7dnEn for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 10:50:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x236.google.com (mail-la0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BCE321A0040 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 10:50:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f54.google.com with SMTP id hz20so3294567lab.13 for ; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 10:50:20 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=QlnwpfxwNlc+7JbiqHgOtpC9zi/qGcPCPOuaqYFkjeE=; b=z13HWFev0VFQCkz9qJONBUuAe7fqfhKfRsW4Xmo6IHNix6bL/4EXi2qAALvsm9Oaud GFVSm1cYfb9uHYzJaglQI/THfXMUdl8y7tjCBtM2GBU3spzU8JI0AhjgfXixCVR8wJit w+D1ExMIVUdsJEvSSpwNEyL9Mzc3Rqv0OYBEuEIBsdvtxLXIvtU9iOD5xifVy2b2VaTx rBPiAlHjZ3Vau5nLJ1D76kTDW464nmcTwbOoSb3NsMJBAZ7svFAM6tvM2XKPVCy1rDpA 4E3VE3+dolniCYTUYcWUMlrvaGMB2vPZy6r5ZsNM6ZUoY9MLw6+POqAiPvvPZoj4TBkR wiRg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.112.169.35 with SMTP id ab3mr17858895lbc.41.1408211420037; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 10:50:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.64.170 with HTTP; Sat, 16 Aug 2014 10:50:19 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 13:50:19 -0400 Message-ID: From: Kathleen Moriarty To: Abdussalam Baryun Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2696a75c73c0500c2c541 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/T0MuVR_c4FTc8UXX_NNoALBmwJk Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , Greg Skinner , S Moonesamy Subject: Re: [Diversity] Community Programs for Diversity (was Re: Questions from USA Today) X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2014 17:50:24 -0000 --001a11c2696a75c73c0500c2c541 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi AB, On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 7:06 AM, Abdussalam Baryun < abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Kathleen, > > My answers and opinions (I may be wrong, so I am discussing to find > with all of you the right solution or direction). IMHO, We need to > make sure that those programs are open programs or programs with > community awareness/review in the general area not only on this list. > Every program is an open program, but they may have a separate list for management from the diversity or general area list. This helps people focus o the one item they may have time to volunteer working on rather than a larger list with many diverse threads on different projects to follow. We work as volunteers, so we need to do our best to respect the time of others. I think that even management need mentoring not only new comers, also > I think the programs should be following one WG of diversity not > following a DT nor an AD. However, I know those suggestions were not > supported. > > On 8/14/14, Kathleen Moriarty wrote: > > Thanks for posting the article, Greg! > > (...) > > > > The mentor program, the fellows program, and policy leader programs are > > also intended to increase diversity. > > > > Are there ideas for other programs that should be started? Is there some > > aspect of the existing ones that can be improved? > > > > The key issue I think in Greg's message is that staff/participants in > an organisation should enjoy their work and their interaction. We need > a reviewer-editor program to improve enjoyment of reviewing/editing or > to make it fun to review and discuss draft's errors. Yes review is > difficult but we can make it enjoyable for all so all will participate > in such process with good quality. > Why don't you write a draft on how you think this could happen? I'm not sure reviewing will always be fun and I do read an awful lot of drafts. In some cases, interactions will be great and in other cases, it may not be so great. As a reviewer, you do have to take a chance and be wrong at times, but acknowledge that and move on. That's not always easy for every reviewer or recipient of reviews. Style of a review and language used in responses seem to go a long way. I continue to tweak my style based on what seems to work best MOST of the time. > I know that there are experts in the same WG that don't have time to > review but we need to make it fun for them to join it. We need to make > sure that participants are not reviewing just to volunteer but also to > have fun while doing that task of review. > > Best regards > > AB > > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > -- Best regards, Kathleen --001a11c2696a75c73c0500c2c541 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi AB,


On Sat, Aug 16, 2014 at 7:06 AM, Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Kathleen,

My answers and opinions (I may be wrong, so I am discussing to find
with all of you the right solution or direction). IMHO, We need to
make sure that those programs are open programs or programs with
community awareness/review in the general area not only on this list.

Every program is an open program, but they m= ay have a separate list for management from the diversity or general area l= ist. =C2=A0This helps people focus o the one item they may have time to vol= unteer working on rather than a larger list with many diverse threads on di= fferent projects to follow. =C2=A0We work as volunteers, so we need to do o= ur best to respect the time of others.

I think that even management need mentoring not only new comers, also
I think the programs should be following one WG of diversity not
following a DT nor an AD. However, I know those suggestions were not
supported.

On 8/14/14, Kathleen Moriarty <kathleen.moriarty.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for posting the article, Greg!
> (...)
>
> The mentor program, the fellows program, and policy leader programs ar= e
> also intended to increase diversity.
>
> Are there ideas for other programs that should be started?=C2=A0 Is th= ere some
> aspect of the existing ones that can be improved?
>

The key issue I think in Greg's message is that staff/participants in an organisation should enjoy their work and their interaction. We need
a reviewer-editor program to improve enjoyment of reviewing/editing or
to make it fun to review and discuss draft's errors. Yes review is
difficult but we can make it enjoyable for all so all will participate
in such process with good quality.

Why don't y= ou write a draft on how you think this could happen? =C2=A0I'm not sure= reviewing will always be fun and I do read an awful lot of drafts. =C2=A0I= n some cases, interactions will be great and in other cases, it may not be = so great. =C2=A0As a reviewer, you do have to take a chance and be wrong at= times, but acknowledge that and move on. =C2=A0That's not always easy = for every reviewer or recipient of reviews. =C2=A0Style of a review and lan= guage used in responses seem to go a long way. =C2=A0I continue to tweak my= style based on what seems to work best MOST of the time.=C2=A0


I know that there are experts in the same WG that don't have time to review but we need to make it fun for them to join it. We need to make
sure that participants are not reviewing just to volunteer but also to
have fun while doing that task of review.

Best regards

AB

_______________________________________________
diversity mailing list
diversity@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity



--

Best regards,
Kathleen
--001a11c2696a75c73c0500c2c541-- From nobody Sun Aug 17 03:40:26 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51CB41A0823 for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2014 03:40:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 sNelZwAjhzdJ for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2014 03:40:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yk0-x230.google.com (mail-yk0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::230]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C22591A07C0 for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2014 03:40:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yk0-f176.google.com with SMTP id 19so3403520ykq.35 for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2014 03:40:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Hrnq7EV6Q3riW7sCkTbk1cSFpIorHw1IM0W/K8eit08=; b=cAwBYadDQsc0u+w7mCjb1ietriUEgwpiAdhVQ1z7Bk/+Jk3ClK35q139p+65Afc4mI 1QHlR43sGg617DGeZp4ktzMRNuFVs8cY96VFHZ2X8Pgu8CJ+WPOITWPKH3aCGeIQv4Q8 NYhNLwDiSJCtAH3MJZxB/0M0sjCw96bK/VW1MpRabzWM1+m+9U8VC7kvINCqhHYUgtH2 LvCkmCXD9Z+iNGZ5WAQfcnAb8n3N60OJFMDIhl+DbS6wpP5Ty4u4APasdhlyy/Yj0ozv PPhNBFrsFRI6pTWfM2mLpDzj3blx4FnfEVuvy/jSOr/vgKjeuYiu6sDheyS+thHNbnqw GA5Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.66.171 with SMTP id h31mr45498yhd.131.1408272023098; Sun, 17 Aug 2014 03:40:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.44.216 with HTTP; Sun, 17 Aug 2014 03:40:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2014 12:40:23 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: Kathleen Moriarty Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/4deFXdlaHGi1dvTHveTo0jq5fq8 Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Diversity] Community Programs for Diversity (was Re: Questions from USA Today) X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2014 10:40:25 -0000 Hi Kathleen, On Saturday, August 16, 2014, Kathleen Moriarty wrote: >> >> >> >> =C2=A0=C2=A0(...) > > Why don't you write a draft on how you think this could happen? I dont know how many drafts are worked on related to diversity. I want to do some drafts for diversity, but not sure if it is the right time for the IETF=C2=A0community.=C2=A0I written one small draft which I thought= it will be my start but my problem was=C2=A0that I don't see how I can discuss it=C2=A0while=C2=A0I have low interaction with the=C2=A0DT, and my low atte= ndance to IETF meetings (I think IETF is directed by attendees). Here I only get replies from you, Adrian, and Moonesamy, and I am progressing. IMHO, my previous draft I spoke to you in the meeting 89 and others will need some attendance from me=C2=A0and more open discussions from other programs you mentioned. I still miss to see an open community discussion/interaction for these issues, or miss to see one success draft submitted (or may be I am not aware of some submitted).=C2=A0However, I will try to finish my draft and submit and discuss with you about your thoughts. Thanks, AB From nobody Sun Aug 17 07:34:52 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FDB71A09DA for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2014 07:34:50 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -100.001 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-100.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham 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 fN7aw0Ig6ONo for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2014 07:34:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (asmtp1.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.248]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A01E01A09D6 for ; Sun, 17 Aug 2014 07:34:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s7HEYjWB009853; Sun, 17 Aug 2014 15:34:45 +0100 Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id s7HEYhrA009842 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 17 Aug 2014 15:34:44 +0100 From: "Adrian Farrel" To: "'Abdussalam Baryun'" , "'Kathleen Moriarty'" References: In-Reply-To: Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2014 15:34:43 +0100 Message-ID: <06c601cfba28$63998f60$2accae20$@olddog.co.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQGx1mEltl+Bv9JgO7jJH8dmPe32WALdeaQyAq2s4Cmb5EcHAA== Content-Language: en-gb X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1576-7.5.0.1018-20888.000 X-TM-AS-Result: No--3.526-10.0-31-10 X-imss-scan-details: No--3.526-10.0-31-10 X-TMASE-MatchedRID: 7ySqCuYCpfg4HKI/yaqRm37siEtWY367YFlSPNA6ZXLSYAzZ6KmqWrn+ nxlSQ+5c38J0s6e6OZZffwEOjaZAw8EElERnDJHCFhQfbPNnjNsg0L4Xy2OHlSgMxnfFXjiIsRC KTKPw3+BBxXa3ZjMBjZEZ+38ubrgbE+rsNmKynBPK09/T6AzbVn0tCKdnhB581kTfEkyaZdz6C0 ePs7A07bPc2SM55IWTGylElaamghdSOIk/3xl+9gBXbitBm2bkcBVmPo1wf7ltbyWYzz31ZQrlT TFQs/OB2EL94+65l+g0ERlDBNB7xVqeUpWs3Tt6h8f9+fd10RPkvmU7gj2frT4n7o4CNd3aodO9 X0I+jcrAvpLE+mvX8g== Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/IaBMFMWurD4HU0lDEtOEzpfrgWM Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Community Programs for Diversity (was Re: Questions from USA Today) X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2014 14:34:50 -0000 > I dont know how many drafts are worked on related to diversity. I want > to do some drafts for diversity, but not sure if it is the right time > for the IETF community. I written one small draft which I thought it > will be my start but my problem was that I don't see how I can discuss > it while I have low interaction with the DT, and my low attendance to > IETF meetings (I think IETF is directed by attendees). Here I only get > replies from you, Adrian, and Moonesamy, and I am progressing. I just did a search for I-Ds you have authored, and I didn't find the = one you are talking about in the paragraph above. Maybe, just maybe, if you posted your I-D it would give people something = to discuss. Of course, it will depend on what the I-D says and whether it interests = the readers. I can't be accountable for that :-) I don't believe your attendance at meetings has anything to do with your = ability to write or submit a draft. People may choose to read the draft = because they don't know you, or maybe they will decide to not read the = draft because they have already met you by email. The only impact = physical attendance might have is if you decide to write about the = physical meetings. Adrian From nobody Tue Aug 19 14:34:40 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1797B1A6F66 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 14:34:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 7WrxKM_P7XHu for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 14:34:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yh0-x22a.google.com (mail-yh0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::22a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9D0761A6F65 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 14:34:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yh0-f42.google.com with SMTP id a41so6293897yho.29 for ; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 14:34:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=ompXl2/GBslA6wnhV2Jeewgdlf6HNNz+IWl1/5oEjX0=; b=UhqT/TuwKgxlA4yiK2Q9POYHY3HJSYGNT4eAOXttX0+Jkr0q0YlJCbuMif5LHp3qih rjnbJkaFwznePDpkwUcV54d1cImtiZDZ8T374zgsU0syXlXOr6na1Jc/jxyAyoOOUjSK jvtKYazCBq63PUHGBD/z6feKGsZJ8pOxWLjk69qRYBl6EC4ll2ihKNgj8VHMX4aJXXUm wO6/MVY3xk4oeC4RlygRNVSGkNqeAVLgL+zn0/GWoo3sb+697uTt7hdS/taqM1rj2At1 JRz8VuHugmoZp5+x7h4Mden1aJCQjaoJfubW76ZRdL6iFZx9FW9ZEoQAJQiTeTEumklV Uxqg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.39.173 with SMTP id d33mr24328966yhb.104.1408484076809; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 14:34:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.44.216 with HTTP; Tue, 19 Aug 2014 14:34:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <06c601cfba28$63998f60$2accae20$@olddog.co.uk> References: <06c601cfba28$63998f60$2accae20$@olddog.co.uk> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 23:34:36 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: "adrian@olddog.co.uk" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1136ac9011f3270501024117 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/5wilZnBvHA5fr8r4_Ko-2RJqJcc Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , Kathleen Moriarty Subject: Re: [Diversity] Community Programs for Diversity (was Re: Questions from USA Today) X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 21:34:39 -0000 --001a1136ac9011f3270501024117 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi Adrian, I will try my best to finish the draft. On Sunday, August 17, 2014, Adrian Farrel wrote: > > I just did a search for I-Ds you have authored, and I didn't find the one > you are talking about in the paragraph above. Still not in IETF, it is still not posted. The reason is due to me unsure of the status of the diversity related drafts/discussions. > > Maybe, just maybe, if you posted your I-D it would give people something > to discuss. I usually only interacted with three persons on this list. But I agree that I have to post a draft so we can discuss it, and I may get more people involved. > Of course, it will depend on what the I-D says and whether it interests > the readers. I can't be accountable for that :-) That is why I prefer to meet others to get feedback so the first draft gets in better condition. I think most who will write about diversity issues for IETF are regular attendees. > > I don't believe your attendance at meetings has anything to do with your > ability to write or submit a draft. People may choose to read the draft > because they don't know you, or maybe they will decide to not read the > draft because they have already met you by email. The only impact physical > attendance might have is if you decide to write about the physical meetings. Yes that is correct but the issue is not simple like that. IMO Writing/reading draft is not important if both are not aware of the diversity status/priorities within IETF. My attendance and me meeting people interested in the diversity problem will help me find the real status of the subject within the IETF. IMHO working remotely is not enough to discover all related issues for the subject. For example, I always thought that IETF diversity may decrease/increase depending mostly IETF meetings which help people make better future decisions. AB --001a1136ac9011f3270501024117 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Adrian,

I will try my best to finish the draft.
On Sunday, August 17, 2014, Adrian Farrel wrote:

I just did a search for I-Ds you have authored, and I didn't find the o= ne you are talking about in the paragraph above.

Still not in IETF, it is still not posted. The reason is due to me=C2= =A0unsure of the status of the diversity related=C2=A0drafts/discussions.= =C2=A0
=C2=A0

Maybe, just maybe, if you posted your I-D it would give people something to= discuss.

I usually=C2=A0only interacted wi= th three persons=C2=A0=C2=A0on this list. But I agree that I have to post a= draft=C2=A0so we can discuss it, and I may get more people involved.=C2=A0=


Of course, it will depend on what the I-D says and whether it interests the= readers. I can't be accountable for that :-)

That is why I prefer=C2=A0to meet others to get feedback so the firs= t=C2=A0draft gets in better condition.=C2=A0I think most=C2=A0who will=C2= =A0write=C2=A0about diversity issues=C2=A0for IETF are regular=C2=A0attende= es.=C2=A0



I don't believe your attendance at meetings has anything to do with you= r ability to write or submit a draft. People may choose to read the draft b= ecause they don't know you, or maybe they will decide to not read the d= raft because they have already met you by email. The only impact physical a= ttendance might have is if you decide to write about the physical meetings.=

Yes that is correct but the=C2=A0issue is=C2=A0not simp= le like that. IMO=C2=A0Writing/reading=C2=A0draft=C2=A0is not important if = both are not aware of the diversity status/priorities=C2=A0within IETF. My= =C2=A0attendance and me=C2=A0meeting people interested in the=C2=A0diversit= y problem=C2=A0will help me find the real status of the subject within the= =C2=A0IETF. IMHO working remotely=C2=A0is not enough to discover all relate= d issues for the subject. For example, I=C2=A0always thought that IETF=C2= =A0diversity may decrease/increase depending mostly=C2=A0IETF meetings whic= h=C2=A0help people make better future=C2=A0decisions.=C2=A0

AB
--001a1136ac9011f3270501024117-- From nobody Thu Aug 21 10:27:11 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99EA41A06FD for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 10:27:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.458 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.458 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham 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 JPBqOMF5gUhD for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 10:27:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BEE61A06D0 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 10:27:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.224.134.85]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s7LHQgLt024266 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 21 Aug 2014 10:26:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1408642018; x=1408728418; bh=1Lpqa35IlMDfFBjn1avuMuxyWOuQ41I4Z/XYJAIEjBo=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=FOxwr5kj9QGDHKXcIZpRT3juRgKZmS72Nd2zCfyVc8Zl5EKmRy2sfwRyESaphW7xH FIeADMbz8gJ6rZlMokrW5KrNn08q0HU/7XaMLxFJxFKb4TJVbxDmaBqUTB8bb6B9+C uJyvaBJ5CGyE4iy0nta7eTWNeERe9SpVNQaUtSUU= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1408642018; x=1408728418; i=@elandsys.com; bh=1Lpqa35IlMDfFBjn1avuMuxyWOuQ41I4Z/XYJAIEjBo=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=pK3wMxvDyR0WIZHPeD5+3y+pcY3pkPiqtvHNi8r/KPWNdf/Am4KikCpnErQwvsxps ATwfW85E2mjghsukH6BcqCnWv9kio7eofLfCGIB/YhbCIb7xNOr+xxDdGRMv114EHi 21fh/4MfOab2rxRZ+O73rAcxKmXkA6JseaYYVUSk= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20140821071141.0b611310@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 07:55:10 -0700 To: Kathleen Moriarty From: S Moonesamy In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140813063030.0b469270@elandnews.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20140816070156.0aa4a5a8@elandnews.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/FlCH_gGIvefaqFUsiNepNKg4zSU Cc: diversity@ietf.org, Abdussalam Baryun Subject: Re: [Diversity] Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:27:10 -0000 Hi Kathleen, At 10:44 16-08-2014, Kathleen Moriarty wrote: >One of the main differences is that the design team identified a few >projects and the projects split off from the design team and the >diversity list to meet their objectives. Or the effort was spurred >on by this push and was managed through the IAB or ISOC. I assume that the projects mentioned above refers to what is listed at http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/diversity-dt/ I don't find any of those mentioned in the public information provided by the IAB. I did a quick search and could not find anything relating to IAB and diversity. I read http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/89/slides/slides-89-iab-techplenary-1.pdf and http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/90/slides/slides-90-iab-techplenary-11.pdf and I did not find any objectives related to topics which have been discussed on this mailing list. Regards, S. Moonesamy From nobody Thu Aug 21 11:55:21 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CCA31A06A4 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 11:55:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 lDuDGYISTvV4 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 11:55:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yh0-x22f.google.com (mail-yh0-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::22f]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 105261A8714 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 11:55:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yh0-f47.google.com with SMTP id f10so8408035yha.34 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 11:55:19 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=jBKkC5roIclIGdCBboMwfDQBXmdE2qm1FaxLPhA83ss=; b=VFf0sCLFrqvuKStW+09AgCphM2yYxSDbXZWKkiuXlakwu68uzFFIbwCwS/DfaKknsU 7rtSWkaJgyqCXiSUD+PnEdZlXs0cx7Pc7N/6TELrPW9GCQZLnS6Smno8vmpSmnd4nwkj YPrTRAs84VezC79WM8ZdepmYBJLgZcIPkzHX1Z7ZYuPSVEZ+Y5cYx3zY7X1G3y81aU1g O0kXZoi47EZWAaEX/FaCpHdEHL4fK6utIE92ZdhofAELz41PeHZmItcfpop4twxHQG03 dBPOKGfb3bCEgL4OKLzF+koXU5gLDPPpjQ1pN4h4pRmckk0f1yknmiqAGSqK9DIbjjDW RxUA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.1.167 with SMTP id 27mr419891yhd.21.1408647319198; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 11:55:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.44.216 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 11:55:19 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 20:55:19 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: S Moonesamy Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e011825d013526e05012843a5 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/Sj-hc20v_l6hmSL-C-I8iaJqiHs Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" Subject: [Diversity] Diversity team wiki (was Re: Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 18:55:21 -0000 --089e011825d013526e05012843a5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Thanks to remind us and notice that the DT has a wiki and some progress which I did not know about. That will help in our discussions/drafts. AB On Thursday, August 21, 2014, S Moonesamy wrote: > Hi Kathleen, > At 10:44 16-08-2014, Kathleen Moriarty wrote: > >> One of the main differences is that the design team identified a few >> projects and the projects split off from the design team and the diversity >> list to meet their objectives. Or the effort was spurred on by this push >> and was managed through the IAB or ISOC. >> > > I assume that the projects mentioned above refers to what is listed at > http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/diversity-dt/ I don't find any of those > mentioned in the public information provided by the IAB. I did a quick > search and could not find anything relating to IAB and diversity. I read > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/89/slides/slides-89-iab-techplenary-1.pdf > and http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/90/slides/slides- > 90-iab-techplenary-11.pdf and I did not find any objectives related to > topics which have been discussed on this mailing list. > > Regards, > S. Moonesamy > --089e011825d013526e05012843a5 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks to remind us and=C2=A0notice that the DT has a wiki and=C2=A0some pr= ogress which I did not know about. That will help in our discussions/drafts= .=C2=A0

AB

On Thursday, August 21, 2014, S Moones= amy wrote:
Hi Kathleen,
At 10:44 16-08-2014, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
One of the main differences is that the design team identified a few projec= ts and the projects split off from the design team and the diversity list t= o meet their objectives.=C2=A0 Or the effort was spurred on by this push an= d was managed through the IAB or ISOC.

I assume that the projects mentioned above refers to what is listed at ht= tp://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/diversity-dt/=C2=A0 I don't f= ind any of those mentioned in the public information provided by the IAB.= =C2=A0 I did a quick search and could not find anything relating to IAB and= diversity.=C2=A0 I read http://www.ietf.org/<= u>proceedings/89/slides/slides-89-iab-techplenary-1.pdf and = http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/90/sli= des/slides-90-iab-techplenary-11.pdf and I did not find any obje= ctives related to topics which have been discussed on this mailing list.
Regards,
S. Moonesamy
--089e011825d013526e05012843a5-- From nobody Thu Aug 21 12:47:26 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4303A1A8A58 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 12:47:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 iaak7GWoiZ83 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 12:47:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-la0-x231.google.com (mail-la0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::231]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 49C9D1A8A88 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 12:47:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-la0-f49.google.com with SMTP id hz20so9161955lab.36 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 12:47:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=eh6OluhgxG5TONjcCisc6yBnmRmCuhDg+zt+3ww0Ivc=; b=PpGpcg86+kGWee0HcDCRBwA0bsSSTqeen/CSmHwJQ1MC2y5jlB4tg3LZK8oGd69b+B XOVBmLebunWLngMdWZOTQ5WknEcqYH45op1kKxj8gcW5IC9gV577HiszofkqcZmqbwUy /0cZo4D7s//9wqJ2uznulnkQLkJhSyxyC9tZ5Qq1PlgDptjotKr9/0nELR+0/hS3PXhD YRYNJQVuaekJEqSQLls96IzJse1d/r4LeoYnUZ5773LgqtVjcu/UILWpuaAzYHDx0bWl BHkgtnPERE+4mvXP1ID7+JSXcatuYKXU+51xpv4CN3DC5dmYj9vvneiM3xtzaMxb6igD ANxw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.4.39 with SMTP id h7mr513437lah.49.1408650420663; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 12:47:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.112.64.170 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 12:47:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 15:47:00 -0400 Message-ID: From: Kathleen Moriarty To: Abdussalam Baryun Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e013d1c46efbd66050128fba3 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/lVsb5l_tV-Q7YDRPA_3I_r6Kw6M Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , S Moonesamy Subject: Re: [Diversity] Diversity team wiki (was Re: Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 19:47:14 -0000 --089e013d1c46efbd66050128fba3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Abdussalam Baryun < abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks to remind us and notice that the DT has a wiki and some progress > which I did not know about. That will help in our discussions/drafts. > > AB > > On Thursday, August 21, 2014, S Moonesamy wrote: > >> Hi Kathleen, >> At 10:44 16-08-2014, Kathleen Moriarty wrote: >> >>> One of the main differences is that the design team identified a few >>> projects and the projects split off from the design team and the diversity >>> list to meet their objectives. Or the effort was spurred on by this push >>> and was managed through the IAB or ISOC. >>> >> >> I assume that the projects mentioned above refers to what is listed at >> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/diversity-dt/ I don't find any of >> those mentioned in the public information provided by the IAB. I did a >> quick search and could not find anything relating to IAB and diversity. I >> read http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/89/slides/slides- >> 89-iab-techplenary-1.pdf and http://www.ietf.org/ >> proceedings/90/slides/slides-90-iab-techplenary-11.pdf and I did not >> find any objectives related to topics which have been discussed on this >> mailing list. >> > I was referring to the Mentor program and then for ISOC the fellows & policy makers. They don't track their projects through the design team, but they do have similar goals in promoting diversity. ISOC is also actively assisting with CodeMatch. > >> Regards, >> S. Moonesamy >> > > _______________________________________________ > diversity mailing list > diversity@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity > > -- Best regards, Kathleen --089e013d1c46efbd66050128fba3 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable



On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Abdussalam Baryun <abdus= salambaryun@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks to remind us and=C2=A0notice that the= DT has a wiki and=C2=A0some progress which I did not know about. That will= help in our discussions/drafts.=C2=A0

AB

On Thursday, August 21, 2014, S Moonesamy wrote:<= br>
Hi Kathleen,
At 10:44 16-08-2014, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
One of the main differences is that the design team identified a few projec= ts and the projects split off from the design team and the diversity list t= o meet their objectives.=C2=A0 Or the effort was spurred on by this push an= d was managed through the IAB or ISOC.

I assume that the projects mentioned above refers to what is listed at ht= tp://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/diversity-dt/=C2=A0 I don't f= ind any of those mentioned in the public information provided by the IAB.= =C2=A0 I did a quick search and could not find anything relating to IAB and= diversity.=C2=A0 I read http://www.ietf.org/<= u>proceedings/89/slides/slides-89-iab-techplenary-1.pdf and = http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/90/sli= des/slides-90-iab-techplenary-11.pdf and I did not find any obje= ctives related to topics which have been discussed on this mailing list.
I was referring to the Mentor program = and then for ISOC the fellows & policy makers. =C2=A0They don't tra= ck their projects through the design team, but they do have similar goals i= n promoting diversity. =C2=A0ISOC is also actively assisting with CodeMatch= .=C2=A0

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

_______________________________________________
diversity mailing list
diversity@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity




--

Best regards,
Kathleen
--089e013d1c46efbd66050128fba3-- From nobody Thu Aug 21 17:35:25 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23C6E1A0AE0 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:35:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.458 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.458 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, GB_I_LETTER=-2, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham 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 MKyrhxcCibMD for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:35:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7FD51A0655 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:35:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.224.134.85]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s7M0YxUh000924 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:35:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1408667711; x=1408754111; bh=UqGElNUDlWm90DETcftg2dBOJlDFrCncZNM97Gxcsm0=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=FVx93SNe8d+X/zKpyLepXucCNe1X8npANGYH9UPt6yTvRUhlj18nNAfLyLKYoJxrr 6A5zcBFRvRRBzmuLfx3Sntfb17uIougZ+bL+Zdi5r126vCc9Cy3VJaKfokc7ud/Zz+ Z8+IiVhWOzb2U2GdTUj8zIhd06bij2vhFV3fNs2k= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1408667711; x=1408754111; i=@elandsys.com; bh=UqGElNUDlWm90DETcftg2dBOJlDFrCncZNM97Gxcsm0=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=hOUfxWqrip6CsPn/EgLzi17MfTucW+hRgftL2zaMvLs7O6xuQ5/5BX9QlZrLPs8z9 oLexgh6RdLVnQSeoMcmY2BdbF3jaB2G2kBKXxTcPYtfoNxHmElnToLuxCQ72aZ0Fbs iq4L0nSSZphPoZWImzEaRQJHocD6Jf83vJ6lRq2I= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20140821130020.0b4717b0@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2014 15:30:38 -0700 To: Kathleen Moriarty , Abdussalam Baryun From: S Moonesamy In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/hNrcPy8h86PnhrwjcTmheBzBNEM Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Diversity team wiki (was Re: Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 00:35:24 -0000 Hi Kathleen, At 12:47 21-08-2014, Kathleen Moriarty wrote: >I was referring to the Mentor program and then for ISOC the fellows >& policy makers. They don't track their projects through the design >team, but they do have similar goals in promoting diversity. ISOC >is also actively assisting with CodeMatch. According to http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg11904.html the Mentor programme is an IETF/IESG effort. Many years ago, an IAB Chair provided some information on the role of the IETF in Internet development, deployment, and governance. Quoting from the letter: "Since 2006 the IETF Fellowship Program, supported by ISOC, has promoted and facilitated participation in IETF meetings by technologists from developing countries. Information on the Fellowship Program can be found on the ISOC website (see references list). Each IETF meeting also includes newcomer training, mentoring, and meet-and-greet events to help first time attendees quickly acclimate to IETF processes and culture." The latest information I could find from the IAB minutes is the following: "The Internet Society will have a large group of policy fellows in London for IETF89. About 17 government representatives in total, primarily from Africa, the Middle East and Europe. In addition, some members of the EU High Level Group on Internet governance may join. The agenda for the group will focus on a mix of meetings including working group sessions, small seminars on key topics, and meetings with key community leaders. An interesting note: at the last regional preparatory meeting for WTDC in Latin America, at least 5 government delegations included one person who had previously attended our IETF policy fellows program. These were key delegations in the region. Several other governments approached us to learn how they could participate in the future." My reading of the above is that it is about policy and government participation. That does not look like promoting diversity in the IETF; I assume that the goal is to have some IETF participation from people residing in developing countries. I took a look at the list of WG Chairs in the Security Area [1]. The persons listed reside in developed countries [2]. I took a look at the list of IESG members [3]. The persons reside in developed countries. I'll quote a comment from a plenary: "Kathleen Moriarty said that in addition to the technical fellows, ISOC also brings a number of policy people from around the world to the meetings. That also increases diversity. In terms of looking at other organisations: what women and young girls need are examples. In the IETF that could mean giving examples that women or people from other regions can be good leaders in a technical environment." What example is the IETF giving? I'll rephrase the paragraph quoted above: said that in addition to the technical fellows, ISOC also brings a number of female policy people to the meetings. That also increases diversity. Would a person view the edited paragraph as increasing diversity? Regards, S. Moonesamy 1. http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ 2. It could be argued that there is one person from a developing country. 3. http://www.ietf.org/iesg/members.html 4. http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/86/minutes/minutes-86-iesg-opsplenary From nobody Thu Aug 21 17:46:36 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88EB31A874F for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:46:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FREEMAIL_REPLY=1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=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 27gTsoFd7Fmh for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:46:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yk0-x236.google.com (mail-yk0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c07::236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 281131A0655 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:46:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yk0-f182.google.com with SMTP id q9so8176035ykb.41 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:46:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=tOBVOaU7VEPpZ8g5sqo5BF1CtBq3AAecLKlgLtxzGWw=; b=Oo0rKUSd2cJoXnJcIntN7tXtt+lbbUKVZ/JJp3vsud6OY8e4Opfvr56ej0vqdfzkfn sPLXosdKUsP7p0PvHCgZPaxhXdd4n/LhY4sGWPZvPJstnKkRX3Ywzt8JxXTNjn+ek7N/ jp1v1c7t46ca7jY1wGzh8Ij6h6WD/nUjaavVN++vsZ4fJ3DJCofyotdRgHssdjgzpXmo x1Zz6WYc6ZQkfekp/H2FoRicbzJW7v4hYbBec4E97P3ZAmMxVQ8jGNI3Dt+spErl1+n+ 3ji2YvvjBle8bbIQM1bj4TbOydOKMjbiKyuh4bsa5PZ9zAF/eT4Cr7TCExp8jXvidsgk Nofg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.128.176 with SMTP id f36mr2438336yhi.87.1408668391439; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:46:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.44.216 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 17:46:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 02:46:31 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: Kathleen Moriarty Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf3011df0d14028605012d2b3d Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/FL0jYmtd213UwhUpx7Z3xbEiVDc Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , S Moonesamy Subject: Re: [Diversity] Diversity team wiki (was Re: Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 00:46:33 -0000 --20cf3011df0d14028605012d2b3d Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Thanks Kathleen, I need to follow up with this DT and these programs so I can get good understanding about progress, because I want to mention that in the draft I am writing (introduction). Is this right way to check on the DT is its Wiki or is there some one I should contact to get feedback on the status of the DT? AB On Thursday, August 21, 2014, Kathleen Moriarty wrote: > > > > On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Abdussalam Baryun < > abdussalambaryun@gmail.com > > wrote: > >> Thanks to remind us and notice that the DT has a wiki and some progress >> which I did not know about. That will help in our discussions/drafts. >> >> AB >> >> On Thursday, August 21, 2014, S Moonesamy wrote: >> >>> Hi Kathleen, >>> At 10:44 16-08-2014, Kathleen Moriarty wrote: >>> >>>> One of the main differences is that the design team identified a few >>>> projects and the projects split off from the design team and the diversity >>>> list to meet their objectives. Or the effort was spurred on by this push >>>> and was managed through the IAB or ISOC. >>>> >>> >>> I assume that the projects mentioned above refers to what is listed at >>> http://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/diversity-dt/ I don't find any of >>> those mentioned in the public information provided by the IAB. I did a >>> quick search and could not find anything relating to IAB and diversity. I >>> read http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/89/slides/slides- >>> 89-iab-techplenary-1.pdf and http://www.ietf.org/ >>> proceedings/90/slides/slides-90-iab-techplenary-11.pdf and I did not >>> find any objectives related to topics which have been discussed on this >>> mailing list. >>> >> I was referring to the Mentor program and then for ISOC the fellows & > policy makers. They don't track their projects through the design team, > but they do have similar goals in promoting diversity. ISOC is also > actively assisting with CodeMatch. > >> >>> Regards, >>> S. Moonesamy >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> diversity mailing list >> diversity@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity >> >> > > > -- > > Best regards, > Kathleen > --20cf3011df0d14028605012d2b3d Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Thanks Kathleen,

I need to follow up with this DT and th= ese programs so I can get good understanding about progress, because I want= to mention that in the draft I am writing (introduction). Is this right wa= y to check on the DT is its Wiki or is there some one I should contact to g= et feedback on the status of the DT?

AB

On Thursday, August 21, 2014, Kathleen= Moriarty wrote:



On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 2:55 PM, Abdussa= lam Baryun <abdussalamba= ryun@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks to remind us and=C2=A0notice that the= DT has a wiki and=C2=A0some progress which I did not know about. That will= help in our discussions/drafts.=C2=A0

AB

On Thursday, August 21, 2014, S Moonesamy wrote:<= br>
Hi Kathleen,
At 10:44 16-08-2014, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
One of the main differences is that the design team identified a few projec= ts and the projects split off from the design team and the diversity list t= o meet their objectives.=C2=A0 Or the effort was spurred on by this push an= d was managed through the IAB or ISOC.

I assume that the projects mentioned above refers to what is listed at ht= tp://trac.tools.ietf.org/group/diversity-dt/=C2=A0 I don't f= ind any of those mentioned in the public information provided by the IAB.= =C2=A0 I did a quick search and could not find anything relating to IAB and= diversity.=C2=A0 I read http://www.ietf.org/<= u>proceedings/89/slides/slides-89-iab-techplenary-1.pdf and = http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/90/sli= des/slides-90-iab-techplenary-11.pdf and I did not find any obje= ctives related to topics which have been discussed on this mailing list.
I was referring to the Mentor program = and then for ISOC the fellows & policy makers. =C2=A0They don't tra= ck their projects through the design team, but they do have similar goals i= n promoting diversity. =C2=A0ISOC is also actively assisting with CodeMatch= .=C2=A0

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

_______________________________________________
diversity mailing list
diversity@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diversity




--

Best regards,
Kathleen
--20cf3011df0d14028605012d2b3d-- From nobody Thu Aug 21 18:05:56 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CFA11A0714 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 18:05:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 JEcTaKyxBmrg for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 18:05:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yh0-x232.google.com (mail-yh0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::232]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4D1F01A8750 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 18:05:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yh0-f50.google.com with SMTP id v1so8624642yhn.37 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 18:05:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=j01xixquhb0NZnl4K4L+xRisLoWpd0rKLwvuGdyzeJs=; b=JUbrJZzn+sC6DqHINOFSjuc/j3Kw9UGn9V8NkwSvYTBkkd5iR6+O0OSbSzZiubYxnA uxDH6gRvjejY+yzOSQdtcgiixSzpGcF9btEhu5Uo2BY34QcNCLXieLXH9UXwDS63JJuJ zsMttqoXa8W1UCsYX9sSg9I4oaYRy8KNr2VMC8AQLu7ViCMKNTPrOOnv0qaJpPWD0jN4 iveK7681lKJnQgb+diJf3vIdpWzwjN9J1ClYyuMQbhSyST+HE6rSJwtQ01TqJihV9P8i JqE27eAwomjBylYB38+Tzf7CzX0oB2H8cITBmL8iKCxXcnEVGJghxMJgIk1sx1rWTWyy SdHQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.61.69 with SMTP id v45mr21421yhc.130.1408669551540; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 18:05:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.44.216 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Aug 2014 18:05:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20140821130020.0b4717b0@elandnews.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140821130020.0b4717b0@elandnews.com> Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 03:05:51 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: S Moonesamy Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0160b5ce39bda305012d709e Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/uCUaR7C0UCqEHAPWgTjJ2FSHC_o Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" , Kathleen Moriarty Subject: Re: [Diversity] Diversity team wiki (was Re: Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2014 01:05:54 -0000 --089e0160b5ce39bda305012d709e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hi Moonesamy, I did not understand your point, but I see diversity progress on this list and hope we can get more efforts in meetings as well. The DT wiki may need some updates or amendments. On Thursday, August 21, 2014, S Moonesamy wrote: > Hi Kathleen, > At 12:47 21-08-2014, Kathleen Moriarty wrote: > >> I was referring to the Mentor program and then for ISOC the fellows & >> policy makers. They don't track their projects through the design team, >> but they do have similar goals in promoting diversity. ISOC is also >> actively assisting with CodeMatch. >> > > According to http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce/ > current/msg11904.html the Mentor programme is an IETF/IESG effort. > > Many years ago, an IAB Chair provided some information on the role of the > IETF in Internet development, deployment, and governance. Quoting from the > letter: > > "Since 2006 the IETF Fellowship Program, supported by ISOC, has promoted > and > facilitated participation in IETF meetings by technologists from > developing > countries. Information on the Fellowship Program can be found on the > ISOC > website (see references list). Each IETF meeting also includes newcomer > training, mentoring, and meet-and-greet events to help first time > attendees > quickly acclimate to IETF processes and culture." > > The latest information I could find from the IAB minutes is the following: > > "The Internet Society will have a large group of policy fellows > in London for IETF89. About 17 government representatives in total, > primarily from Africa, the Middle East and Europe. In addition, > some members of the EU High Level Group on Internet governance > may join. The agenda for the group will focus on a mix of meetings > including working group sessions, small seminars on key topics, > and meetings with key community leaders. An interesting note: at > the last regional preparatory meeting for WTDC in Latin America, > at least 5 government delegations included one person who had > previously attended our IETF policy fellows program. These were > key delegations in the region. Several other governments approached > us to learn how they could participate in the future." > > My reading of the above is that it is about policy and government > participation. That does not look like promoting diversity in the IETF; I > assume that the goal is to have some IETF participation from people > residing in developing countries. I took a look at the list of WG Chairs > in the Security Area [1]. The persons listed reside in developed countries > [2]. I took a look at the list of IESG members [3]. The persons reside in > developed countries. I'll quote a comment from a plenary: > > "Kathleen Moriarty said that in addition to the technical fellows, ISOC > also brings a number of policy people from around the world to the > meetings. That also increases diversity. In terms of looking at other > organisations: what women and young girls need are examples. In the > IETF that could mean giving examples that women or people from other > regions can be good leaders in a technical environment." That is good for the community and for IETF. > > What example is the IETF giving? I'll rephrase the paragraph quoted above: > > said that in addition to the technical fellows, ISOC also brings a > number of female policy people to the meetings. That also increases > diversity. > > Would a person view the edited paragraph as increasing diversity? Yes, I think so. The DT should cooperate with other efforts to ensure better increase. If we don't work together that means no use of diversity even if it increased. Regards AB > Regards, > S. Moonesamy > > 1. http://tools.ietf.org/wg/ > 2. It could be argued that there is one person from a developing country. > 3. http://www.ietf.org/iesg/members.html > 4. http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/86/minutes/minutes-86-iesg-opsplenary > --089e0160b5ce39bda305012d709e Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Moonesamy,

I did not understand your point, but I see= diversity progress=C2=A0on this list and hope we can get more efforts=C2= =A0in meetings as well. The DT wiki may need some updates or=C2=A0amendment= s.=C2=A0


On Thursday, August 21, 2014, S Moonesamy wrote:
Hi Kathleen,
At 12:47 21-08-2014, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
I was referring to the Mentor program and then for ISOC the fellows & p= olicy makers.=C2=A0 They don't track their projects through the design = team, but they do have similar goals in promoting diversity.=C2=A0 ISOC is = also actively assisting with CodeMatch.

According to http://www.ietf.org/mail-ar= chive/web/ietf-announce/current/msg11904.html the Mentor program= me is an IETF/IESG effort.

Many years ago, an IAB Chair provided some information on the role of the I= ETF in Internet development, deployment, and governance.=C2=A0 Quoting from= the letter:

=C2=A0 "Since 2006 the IETF Fellowship Program, supported by ISOC, has= promoted and
=C2=A0 =C2=A0facilitated participation in IETF meetings by technologists fr= om developing
=C2=A0 =C2=A0countries.=C2=A0 Information on the Fellowship Program can be = found on the ISOC
=C2=A0 =C2=A0website (see references list). Each IETF meeting also includes= newcomer
=C2=A0 =C2=A0training, mentoring, and meet-and-greet events to help first t= ime attendees
=C2=A0 =C2=A0quickly acclimate to IETF processes and culture."

The latest information I could find from the IAB minutes is the following:<= br>
=C2=A0"The Internet Society will have a large group of policy fellows<= br> =C2=A0 in London for IETF89.=C2=A0 About 17 government representatives in t= otal,
=C2=A0 primarily from Africa, the Middle East and Europe. In addition,
=C2=A0 some members of the EU High Level Group on Internet governance
=C2=A0 may join. The agenda for the group will focus on a mix of meetings =C2=A0 including working group sessions, small seminars on key topics,
=C2=A0 and meetings with key community leaders.=C2=A0 An interesting note: = at
=C2=A0 the last regional preparatory meeting for WTDC in Latin America,
=C2=A0 at least 5 government delegations included one person who had
=C2=A0 previously attended our IETF policy fellows program. These were
=C2=A0 key delegations in the region.=C2=A0 Several other governments appro= ached
=C2=A0 us to learn how they could participate in the future."

My reading of the above is that it is about policy and government participa= tion.=C2=A0 That does not look like promoting diversity in the IETF; I assu= me that the goal is to have some IETF participation from people residing in= developing countries.=C2=A0 I took a look at the list of WG Chairs in the = Security Area [1].=C2=A0 The persons listed reside in developed countries [= 2].=C2=A0 I took a look at the list of IESG members [3].=C2=A0 The persons = reside in developed countries.=C2=A0 I'll quote a comment from a plenar= y:

=C2=A0 "Kathleen Moriarty said that in addition to the technical fello= ws, ISOC
=C2=A0 =C2=A0also brings a number of policy people from around the world to= the
=C2=A0 =C2=A0meetings. That also increases diversity. In terms of looking a= t other
=C2=A0 =C2=A0organisations: what women and young girls need are examples. I= n the
=C2=A0 =C2=A0IETF that could mean giving examples that women or people from= other
=C2=A0 =C2=A0regions can be good leaders in a technical environment."<= /blockquote>

That is good for the community and for IETF= .=C2=A0
=C2=A0

What example is the IETF giving?=C2=A0 I'll rephrase the paragraph quot= ed above:

=C2=A0 =C2=A0 said that in addition to the technical fellows, ISOC also bri= ngs a
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 number of female policy people to the=C2=A0 meetings.=C2=A0 T= hat also increases
=C2=A0 =C2=A0 diversity.

Would a person view the edited paragraph as increasing diversity?

Yes, I think so.=C2=A0The DT should cooperate with o= ther efforts to ensure better increase. If we don't work together that = means no use of diversity even if it=C2=A0increased.=C2=A0

Regards

AB



Regards,
S. Moonesamy

1. http://tools.iet= f.org/wg/
2. It could be argued that there is one person from a developing country. 3. http= ://www.ietf.org/iesg/members.html
4. http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/86/minut= es/minutes-86-iesg-opsplenary=C2=A0
--089e0160b5ce39bda305012d709e-- From nobody Sat Aug 23 13:00:58 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 362761A88A0 for ; Sat, 23 Aug 2014 13:00:56 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0.823 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.823 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DATE_IN_PAST_03_06=1.592, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668] autolearn=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 2bHfEsMna3X6 for ; Sat, 23 Aug 2014 13:00:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFE1B1A88E9 for ; Sat, 23 Aug 2014 12:59:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.224.147.40]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s7NJwbbH000070 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 23 Aug 2014 12:58:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1408823933; x=1408910333; bh=1H1ICiAbdnRCB3o+QejPYixU8xJOzBTW+NugD1RAl7c=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=WJ/FGNN+e4yHecXdDIKE+w29wO+o88PuBA9XNmF5+Fl4LAvkkG4VXiHRamq3BETrT hcZ2qy6Pr2EpECcdARlGdjnF8ewUDma6OWfM1eH4eG3a4ib/cXVrhqG4KemOqHRrE4 scZdvHYZHHE2BW9WYmXB0KuYCW3rn9ueEBVvBArI= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1408823933; x=1408910333; i=@elandsys.com; bh=1H1ICiAbdnRCB3o+QejPYixU8xJOzBTW+NugD1RAl7c=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=MkMDLlr2EVvVHpA/+3vulB9SUsNgG6TrvGWe22rxQ9fGYQYvy7fuAiu5kxjZhjV2M Puao+XlZ6ohXif99w3mlb/KBh681K2mrAq0GFi1ofdgkthsoWYHbd2kjOdHSmEUnHu pvkbLn7H8A3HaurUwp9ax6LpZHR5jN1lhRWq8cVc= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20140823053636.0b2b4758@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2014 07:03:44 -0700 To: Abdussalam Baryun From: S Moonesamy In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140821130020.0b4717b0@elandnews.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/Txg0TDCeMWO3UGbU-SAjbLOvGGk Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Diversity team wiki (was Re: Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2014 20:00:56 -0000 Hi Abdussalam, At 18:05 21-08-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: >I did not understand your point, but I see diversity progress on >this list and hope we can get more efforts in meetings as well. The >DT wiki may need some updates or amendments. The point was that I could not find any IAB effort in respect to diversity. I do not think that there will be more efforts in meetings given the comments from the last plenary. The Wiki page was last edited about 10 months ago. There are 10 initiatives marked "volunteer needed". There weren't any volunteers. It is somewhat like people do not know what to do. Regards, S. Moonesamy From nobody Sat Aug 23 15:20:02 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03DE31A0B15 for ; Sat, 23 Aug 2014 15:20:00 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 BaFwOkd3x_l4 for ; Sat, 23 Aug 2014 15:19:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yh0-x236.google.com (mail-yh0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 64E811A0B09 for ; Sat, 23 Aug 2014 15:19:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yh0-f54.google.com with SMTP id v1so10054911yhn.27 for ; Sat, 23 Aug 2014 15:19:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=xlNRzQDDbenGIzIxyz5uxmjNwcGhkkcpU9WQbWDQwY4=; b=g6v5P+Ez5WN8zPN+mvsbhBZ/w0yJclqiTRTny48dNU009Jfm441baFPtjYwy7j0iVR QVVISZ4upAZRBjgX+254bnS+NWziwyhR/DbhTix0RSOGxaPUlgZ8RzkuNi4WASue03Y5 zHIgopKzSzrO8XejEnb0+yyUxZRUE1FvXUoEp8Z/Pu184IcsAsrJtvygnFeRTeBwrCI0 EijW8aTKQ1TaSjHqIoIv9/C3kDcuV5Pu+f/Zbvm64YYU9TETkT0PQrZ9dB14Cv5pb40R +BDv5+vIQUvMq/EfT2yg+u1zpv5wP1blabdbEyuwk3DGb3M7vpnt+azqOclZ5TwWvf0/ sFUg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.38.225 with SMTP id a61mr20023304yhb.35.1408832397656; Sat, 23 Aug 2014 15:19:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.44.216 with HTTP; Sat, 23 Aug 2014 15:19:57 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20140823053636.0b2b4758@elandnews.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140821130020.0b4717b0@elandnews.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20140823053636.0b2b4758@elandnews.com> Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2014 00:19:57 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: S Moonesamy Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01634dec9c49fa0501535aec Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/b9zsbcd_eEmS-mi9LVvv-gui8-Y Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Diversity] Diversity team wiki (was Re: Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2014 22:20:00 -0000 --089e01634dec9c49fa0501535aec Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hello Moonesamy, I thought you are a participant in the DT. I would like to know about the reasons for the issue you raised about the Wiki. If the DT have some difficulties then I may have also similar while doing my drafts for diversity. On Saturday, August 23, 2014, S Moonesamy wrote: > Hi Abdussalam, > At 18:05 21-08-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: > >> I did not understand your point, but I see diversity progress on this >> list and hope we can get more efforts in meetings as well. The DT wiki may >> need some updates or amendments. >> > > The point was that I could not find any IAB effort in respect to > diversity. I do not think that there will be more efforts in meetings > given the comments from the last plenary. We can discuss with IAB regarding that, there may be a reason, but we in IETF can make more efforts. > > The Wiki page was last edited about 10 months ago. There are 10 > initiatives marked "volunteer needed". There weren't any volunteers. It > is somewhat like people do not know what to do. IMHO it was not advertised to the community for finding volunteers. There may be some reasons for that which are hidden. I tried to communicate in past with the DT but was not able to identify their total efforts, reports and way of work. I think the DT is the responsibility of who assigned it, and not the community responsibility. I would be happy to volunteer if the DT is more open to the community in terms of reporting regularly. AB --089e01634dec9c49fa0501535aec Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Moonesamy,

I thought you are a=C2=A0participant in= =C2=A0the DT. I would like to know about the reasons for the issue you rais= ed about the Wiki. If the DT have some difficulties then I may=C2=A0have al= so similar while doing my drafts for diversity.=C2=A0

On Saturday, August 23, 2014, S Moonesamy wrote:
Hi Abdussalam,
At 18:05 21-08-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
I did not understand your point, but I see diversity progress on this list = and hope we can get more efforts in meetings as well. The DT wiki may need = some updates or amendments.

The point was that I could not find any IAB effort in respect to diversity.= =C2=A0 I do not think that there will be more efforts in meetings given the= comments from the last plenary.

We can dis= cuss with IAB regarding that, there may be a reason, but we in IETF can mak= e more efforts.=C2=A0
=C2=A0

The Wiki page was last edited about 10 months ago.=C2=A0 There are 10 initi= atives marked "volunteer needed".=C2=A0 There weren't any vol= unteers.=C2=A0 It is somewhat like people do not know what to do.

IMHO it=C2=A0was not advertised to the community for finding=C2= =A0volunteers. There may be some reasons for that which are hidden.=C2=A0I= =C2=A0tried to communicate in past=C2=A0with the=C2=A0DT but was not able t= o identify their total=C2=A0efforts, reports=C2=A0and=C2=A0way of work. I t= hink the=C2=A0DT is the responsibility of who assigned it, and not the=C2= =A0community responsibility. I=C2=A0would=C2=A0be happy to volunteer if the= DT is more open to the community in terms of reporting regularly.=C2=A0

AB
=C2=A0
--089e01634dec9c49fa0501535aec-- From nobody Sun Aug 24 12:48:22 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB3E81A0697 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 12:48:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.081 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.081 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, DATE_IN_PAST_12_24=1.049, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668] autolearn=ham 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 Q8k5rMDN3b3x for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 12:48:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBE991A06B8 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 12:48:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.224.132.176]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s7OJlwdS009883 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 24 Aug 2014 12:48:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1408909692; x=1408996092; bh=E4huCGUdu2GULL+lgiHuhL69WGAGNGcd7Md013FZ4dU=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=JHwXq7xBNSxuvxWbsFHLMqHi76pfw8GHcxbYukgLL35t1UnUyrLhgyR1kwakGrHO4 oYeCQLRi+UoPIbHeXhUbsu4dLolh4gOPLzFdgyuOrsYtlYmcJhFajhKVhesEZT4d3Y 9C/waycmiAPEsfHLqgx4mAkRJ0hq6lzt17iU52Z8= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1408909692; x=1408996092; i=@elandsys.com; bh=E4huCGUdu2GULL+lgiHuhL69WGAGNGcd7Md013FZ4dU=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=I00HK9Kq1JJI2IzvKIsbuHtN3tbKddoTlYieCMzwP72fCbVfHcIY/Z4AHpmCpoINT dFHdnXob77gZDfzghPt0WLPZLh33Nw0poSGVKvSvwj1NYmbjLs7fUQUXrwzTwoUjyY /m71htjrZMgtFvkq+Ytg3gtWUl3oKExY9A46DBO4= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20140823174316.0beadf38@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2014 18:29:02 -0700 To: Abdussalam Baryun From: S Moonesamy In-Reply-To: References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140821130020.0b4717b0@elandnews.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20140823053636.0b2b4758@elandnews.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/t3-SX7burIknsHq-h_D4cK6iz3g Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] Diversity team wiki (was Re: Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2014 19:48:21 -0000 Hi Abdussalam, At 15:19 23-08-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: >I thought you are a participant in the DT. I would like to know >about the reasons for the issue you raised about the Wiki. If the DT >have some difficulties then I may have also similar while doing my >drafts for diversity. I have not being doing anything since at least six months. I do not consider the Wiki as a problem. Here's a rough summary of ietf@ietf.org participation for the last week: United States 27 United Kingdom 5 Canada 2 Ireland 1 Switzerland 1 New Zealand 1 Greece 1 Israel 1 Australia 1 Japan 1 Finland 1 And by IETF region: North America 29 Europe 9 Asia 1 The (unverified) gender ratio at meetings is seven male to one female. The gender ratio for the IESG is four male to one female. >We can discuss with IAB regarding that, there may be a reason, but >we in IETF can make more efforts. I would not discuss about the topic with the IAB. Regards, S. Moonesamy From nobody Sun Aug 24 21:47:10 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 770D11A8A0C for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 21:47:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.1 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 2mGmHzkWsbqA for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 21:47:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yh0-x229.google.com (mail-yh0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::229]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ABF5E1A8A09 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 21:47:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yh0-f41.google.com with SMTP id b6so10584354yha.28 for ; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 21:47:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=YejlJyChJMj/7VKYNBJpoZPQP2gURqZsEFje/HHwLMs=; b=mrgPEiPYalDj808prKHAPDkGovsJxxUoyt9H3hq1LzL96mpmi5x6/ZzuWiuUBCKB1P lHLFx/XSbFPPMuHGrkhNaWPZ2IjiWxC3d0e1dvTkENvHkt1Im8RK4oFPKvzO3LI444Rd R93DlBVMwxDIpw1mNKACM+XT4QnP1jCsIWLkLiKdxn7GHMPCJg1orUhAyt2V3lGDv29c wi52CW9K09QT9tWprb+ifCKRCnoWnPy8KQCrBP/DxJQbRQAEnyLQIc1EmBVWdGgsH+rV ewaZ7/ih5xgBvGPdazRo0malZvp+VNom9wiRLs3K8I8RvazycCRjjK45d1xGwhJSXRLu yQvg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.100.147 with SMTP id z19mr30674295yhf.70.1408942027030; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 21:47:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.44.216 with HTTP; Sun, 24 Aug 2014 21:47:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 06:47:06 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: S Moonesamy Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf3011d9e707c4cd05016ce1d9 Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/uObACZFaot6WGqNmTu91SQeVREc Cc: "diversity@ietf.org" Subject: [Diversity] IETF and IAB efforts (was Diversity team wiki (was Re: Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 04:47:09 -0000 --20cf3011d9e707c4cd05016ce1d9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hello Moonesamy, On Saturday, August 23, 2014, S Moonesamy wrote: > Hi Abdussalam, > At 18:05 21-08-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: > >> I did not understand your point, but I see diversity progress on this >> list and hope we can get more efforts in meetings as well. The DT wiki may >> need some updates or amendments. >> > > The point was that I could not find any IAB effort in respect to > diversity. I do not think that there will be more efforts in meetings > given the comments from the last plenary. IMO, The main issues is that there is no body in the IETF responsible for making efforts for diversity issues, we just have programs. There is no IETF WG to promote diversity into IETF systems. So why do we need IAB efforts if we don't organise our efforts. I think we need organised efforts first by an IETF WG then we will see more efforts by IAB. AB --20cf3011d9e707c4cd05016ce1d9 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Moonesamy,

On Saturday, August 23, 2014, S Moonesamy wrote:<= br>
Hi Abdussalam,
At 18:05 21-08-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
I did not understand your point, but I see diversity progress on this list = and hope we can get more efforts in meetings as well. The DT wiki may need = some updates or amendments.

The point was that I could not find any IAB effort in respect to diversity.= =C2=A0 I do not think that there will be more efforts in meetings given the= comments from the last plenary.

IMO,=C2=A0= The main issues is that there is no body in the=C2=A0IETF responsible for m= aking efforts for diversity issues, we just have programs.=C2=A0There is no= =C2=A0IETF WG=C2=A0to promote=C2=A0diversity into IETF systems. So=C2=A0why= do=C2=A0we need=C2=A0IAB efforts if we don't organise=C2=A0our efforts= .=C2=A0I think we need organised=C2=A0efforts first by an IETF WG then we w= ill see more efforts by IAB.=C2=A0

AB


--20cf3011d9e707c4cd05016ce1d9-- From nobody Mon Aug 25 02:48:40 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73DB71A8AFE for ; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 02:48:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.668 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.668 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668] autolearn=ham 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 q0PFfAHfyBHX for ; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 02:48:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43BCA1A8AFB for ; Mon, 25 Aug 2014 02:48:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.224.132.176]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s7P9mDuc005442 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 25 Aug 2014 02:48:23 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1408960106; x=1409046506; bh=AhiqTqYyOJotp1N4xMI6Csc8rTQi8WSAY49Ku/wnq/I=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=ksN+QhSvcDfX3wtzhObBj0dOdgshz5M3bMTqoGSfK08MDHbtBdqjkL9oirKkWiFYX NFBFkX0uMnUseWEXuswTu+wT9XzMINjY9bTgZpcegnvJ50lIzT4HCaEvujdoQdvb8L ua1KO6oyBEaEChwI9biHWUpZKEoXycSILrT4YweA= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1408960106; x=1409046506; i=@elandsys.com; bh=AhiqTqYyOJotp1N4xMI6Csc8rTQi8WSAY49Ku/wnq/I=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=KsogrKTax5Nx3PxjmCg4dkMUMc5rQ5WNWiMzmuqc5KuBI90eGO2IA2xb0Y4gLjjv3 QBSVMpb3LKiWVUg52LE0O8PtqD+K8u8cryk3TnSBAMXHAZXN1lsNIQ4iubEcZq9KUe rSszJQKNPnfZpknj46gqWaZY1lIh7qwAWSxcdvLg= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20140824221909.0cbab170@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 01:42:23 -0700 To: Abdussalam Baryun From: S Moonesamy In-Reply-To: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/3apaBrBqiEvYibJQxoR-oLR9e9c Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] IETF and IAB efforts (was Diversity team wiki (was Re: Questions from USA Today X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 09:48:38 -0000 Hi Abdussalam, At 21:47 24-08-2014, Abdussalam Baryun wrote: >IMO, The main issues is that there is no body in the IETF >responsible for making efforts for diversity issues, we just have >programs. There is no IETF WG to promote diversity into IETF >systems. So why do we need IAB efforts if we don't organise our >efforts. I think we need organised efforts first by an IETF WG then >we will see more efforts by IAB. I have not argued that IAB efforts are needed or not needed. If I understood the paragraph quoted above, what is being suggested is that "we need organized efforts first by an IETF WG". There was a message sent to this mailing list on August 4. That message contained an explanation of the steps to create a working group. The paragraph quoted above mentions that "we have programs". I assume that it refers to "IAB programs". I took a look at the list of IAB programs and I did not find any program related to diversity issues. It is usually suggested to write an Internet-Draft about a problem or a solution. I understand that a person may be unfamiliar with writing an Internet-Draft if he or she has not written one before. An alternative is to write a message which describes the problem or the solution. I'll provide an example; the problem is that people from Antarctica are not receiving any acknowledgement in RFCs because these people living in Antarctica. The message or Internet-Draft would include information about IETF participants living in Antarctica, their IETF Contributions and the RFCs which did not contain the acknowledgements. The person reading the message or Internet-Draft would be able to understand whether there is a problem affecting people living in Antarctica. Regards, S. Moonesamy From nobody Fri Aug 29 00:26:24 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57CB01A0679 for ; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 00:26:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.559 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.559 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham 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 OBNeIx3LMvr9 for ; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 00:26:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33AEC1A0677 for ; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 00:26:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.224.151.71]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s7T7Q2wi026654 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 29 Aug 2014 00:26:13 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1409297175; x=1409383575; bh=jbaMRn61Z8o8ITWdjgwqJweTG+oXdXYbgFYRp1Lr+Vo=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc; b=ZpYRz7ksz4PWWp7/dE2Eq+SXx6vQaRSPiopwhs9+jxkBR67fsmRoSay3JotEitMYq kveWB4FKB1YouVwwk3siI6rwSaTOiCMz9GLD1eJ4s7nfqRH5wgPJktBbuqD0hHJ832 Ou7H5aLrQYP3gJJKzU5/a9KDWUo0n33w9SgH/UR0= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1409297175; x=1409383575; i=@elandsys.com; bh=jbaMRn61Z8o8ITWdjgwqJweTG+oXdXYbgFYRp1Lr+Vo=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc; b=kMfB1aB/k69QSAvtww78oM528tEaWkXs5opEQ0GNOrzDqdWhDXT54041zjRQVBm6N 8s2LydUkp/Z8B/8m0sDWuVMjiI+aZDgxSM1KBhEK3rBVggvBJD78fhPkkzhlFza57n Njo/whkQ0KQcpgjUu567ENbiPObfc5R5H3eMKghs= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20140826121923.0d615b68@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 00:26:00 -0700 To: Dave Crocker , Narelle Clark From: S Moonesamy Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/pygBvHdwiKrxdNMBPqOEHw9rB2c Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: [Diversity] draft-crocker-diversity-conduct-01 X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 07:26:22 -0000 Hi Narelle, Dave, I read draft-crocker-diversity-conduct-01. I am not thinking clearly as I write this. Quoting from Section 2.1: "The same people from the same education and experience will all too readily bring the same ideas forward and subject them to the same analysis, thus diminishing the likelihood for new ideas and methods to emerge, or underlying problems to be noted." Another problem is if the new people are given to believe that it is appropriate to think like the same people. In other words, what is being fostered is a culture which prevents new ideas from emerging. "Nomcom is itself a potentially diverse group of IETF participants, chosen almost at random." That should, in theory, prevent the problem(s) mentioned about from happening. I rephrase the quoted text as: Nomcom is itself a potentially diverse group of IETF attendees, chosen almost at random. and some text from the draft: in the late 1980s, participation in the group became fully open, permitting attendance by anyone in the United States. The above would not be a problem as most of the people who might wish to participate are from the United States and the cost of the airfare and hotel would not be too expensive. As more people from the rest of the world take an interest in participating the cost ends up being too expensive for some people, whether they are from the United States or from other countries. This is where attendance becomes dependent upon working for a corporation. Rephrasing text again: Nomcom is itself a potentially diverse group of corporate IETF attendees, chosen almost at random. Even though the selection is still random the results would be skewed as the population is no longer diverse. It is unlikely that the selection process would encourage varying attributes among members and that is what triggered the diversity debate. It is difficult to attain a balance (Section 3.4). Mailing list participation is more onerous. The cost is, unfortunately, not quantified. I'll go off-topic here (feel free to ignore). The IETF measures RFC authorship. The IETF does not measure reviews. A person may bring in a new idea. A significant amount of the work might be from other persons, i.e. the reviewers. The external view is that the author wrote everything. The value of a contribution (Section 3.6) is a subjective assessment. The point in the second sentence is about the contribution triggering a negative reaction. It took me some time to realize that I was reading "contribution" in an IETF sense instead of the way it was (likely) intended. I agree that "obtaining meaningful diversity requires more than generic good will and statements of principle". This is where the fear of retribution comes in. Regards, S. Moonesamy From nobody Fri Aug 29 12:05:55 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ABF31A0B83 for ; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 12:05:53 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham 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 DVdWCyymMK6O for ; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 12:05:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yh0-x229.google.com (mail-yh0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::229]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C1CB1A0B0A for ; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 12:05:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yh0-f41.google.com with SMTP id 29so1804317yhl.0 for ; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 12:05:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=VXf3np8B4kDj+umj/5DYj6bg2UraaMpDABmodoncBqs=; b=UFsW3O15FnYjtlycN6260KFTmErM/rUznR3b5jjKOrCFKXIfdWuEB84VPpH8ayiZK9 LNtES21irrNSH/HSd6Ul2Kwbhv7NjkLL95mEzKX/fjY5YNaR6V+I1h+kOFNMjpPDMWto mM5+NC8MWDtdAFwYojIKjq4Ld0SHwud8cHM3lxR4hBsXpzbmiE/GH79l9NhV6tM/TQUd XQL6RC/TU+tNxxYPpiPcCFFKrN+RKBa0iQ4PnD4VPYKXgfIjuqwQTj4efz+PQnWGjTWP 0uVB3KZ4Mpg3pwOjN8MEsLdLhSx46CJDBVuaOj9Qx/5z/XiunsSnapTp7p8sIu15xPOh UNCw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.236.203.134 with SMTP id f6mr4118015yho.125.1409339151549; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 12:05:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.170.44.216 with HTTP; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 12:05:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20140826121923.0d615b68@elandnews.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140826121923.0d615b68@elandnews.com> Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 21:05:51 +0200 Message-ID: From: Abdussalam Baryun To: S Moonesamy Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e015382927f0d520501c9578f Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/txVElFIojYKA1vOriaxzxo230G8 Cc: Narelle Clark , Dave Crocker , "diversity@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Diversity] draft-crocker-diversity-conduct-01 X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 19:05:53 -0000 --089e015382927f0d520501c9578f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Hello Moonesamy, On Friday, August 29, 2014, S Moonesamy wrote: > Hi Narelle, Dave, > > I read draft-crocker-diversity-conduct-01. I am not thinking clearly as > I write this. Quoting from Section 2.1: > > "The same people from the same education and experience will all > too readily bring the same ideas forward and subject them to the > same analysis, thus diminishing the likelihood for new ideas and > methods to emerge, or underlying problems to be noted." I don't agree totally with that. > > Another problem is if the new people are given to believe that it is > appropriate to think like the same people. In other words, what is being > fostered is a culture which prevents new ideas from emerging. IMHO New ideas come from young participants or new ideas come from interaction between different experiences. > "Nomcom is itself a potentially diverse group of IETF participants, > chosen almost at random." Random chosen does not maintain diversity in the Nomcom, because if we have 10 women per 100 men attendance, and 10 Asians per 100 Americans attendance, then when randomly chosen we get a high possibility of getting all Nomcom members becoming men and Americans. I usually prefer a random choosing with considerations for diversity to ensure increase of IETF diversity. AB --089e015382927f0d520501c9578f Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello Moonesamy,

On Friday, August 29, 2014, S Moonesamy wrote:
=
Hi Narelle, Dave,

I read draft-crocker-diversity-conduct-01.=C2=A0 I am not thinking c= learly as I write this.=C2=A0 Quoting from Section 2.1:

=C2=A0 "The same people from the same education and experience will al= l
=C2=A0 =C2=A0too readily bring the same ideas forward and subject them to t= he
=C2=A0 =C2=A0same analysis, thus diminishing the likelihood for new ideas a= nd
=C2=A0 =C2=A0methods to emerge, or underlying problems to be noted."

I don't agree totally with that.=C2=A0= =C2=A0

Another problem is if the new people are given to believe that it is approp= riate to think like the same people.=C2=A0 In other words, what is being fo= stered is a culture which prevents new ideas from emerging.

IMHO=C2=A0New ideas come from young participants or new idea= s come from interaction between different experiences.=C2=A0

=

=C2=A0 "Nomcom is itself a potentially diverse group of IETF participa= nts,
=C2=A0 =C2=A0chosen almost at random."

=C2=A0Random chosen does not maintain diversity in the Nomcom, because if = we have 10 women per=C2=A0100 men attendance,=C2=A0and=C2=A010 Asians per 1= 00 Americans attendance, then when randomly chosen we get a high=C2=A0possi= bility of getting=C2=A0all Nomcom members becoming=C2=A0men and Americans. = I usually prefer a random choosing with considerations for diversity to ens= ure increase of IETF=C2=A0diversity.=C2=A0

AB
--089e015382927f0d520501c9578f-- From nobody Fri Aug 29 23:21:49 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAF251A878C for ; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 23:21:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.834 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.834 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_50=0.8, FU_ENDS_2_WRDS=0.255, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779] autolearn=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 OcYGtF3oXBB6 for ; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 23:21:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from svr35.internet-webhosting.com (svr35.internet-webhosting.com [103.8.25.40]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 471C21A878B for ; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 23:21:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.cis-india.org ([202.190.125.68]:60327) by svr35.internet-webhosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1XNc2b-00082E-6C; Sat, 30 Aug 2014 14:21:37 +0800 Received: from [10.225.97.80] (unknown [83.111.212.208]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.cis-india.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 623E9A7C749; Sat, 30 Aug 2014 05:55:35 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <54016D6E.9000606@cis-india.org> Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2014 10:21:34 +0400 From: Pranesh Prakash Organization: Centre for Internet and Society User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: S Moonesamy , Dave Crocker , Narelle Clark References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140826121923.0d615b68@elandnews.com> In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20140826121923.0d615b68@elandnews.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="iGhEg9CKxPjbxG5lRPrFbro60VNL8jtPG" X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - svr35.internet-webhosting.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - cis-india.org X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: svr35.internet-webhosting.com: authenticated_id: benedict.baskar@selectv.co Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/y0yXBJE28-YkmqOUNWdKqHRq_mw Cc: diversity@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Diversity] draft-crocker-diversity-conduct-01 X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2014 06:21:45 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --iGhEg9CKxPjbxG5lRPrFbro60VNL8jtPG Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable S Moonesamy [2014-08-29 00:26:00 -0700]: > "Nomcom is itself a potentially diverse group of IETF participants, > chosen almost at random." > > That should, in theory, prevent the problem(s) mentioned about from > happening. How? > I rephrase the quoted text as: > > Nomcom is itself a potentially diverse group of IETF attendees, > chosen almost at random. > =2E.. > Rephrasing text again: > > Nomcom is itself a potentially diverse group of corporate IETF > attendees, chosen almost at random. > > Even though the selection is still random the results would be skewed a= s > the population is no longer diverse. It is unlikely that the selection= > process would encourage varying attributes among members and that is > what triggered the diversity debate. Exactly. I don't understand how you're squaring this with the above.=20 position. --=20 Pranesh Prakash Policy Director, Centre for Internet and Society T: +91 80 40926283 | W: http://cis-india.org ------------------- Access to Knowledge Fellow, Information Society Project, Yale Law School M: +1 520 314 7147 | W: http://yaleisp.org PGP ID: 0x1D5C5F07 | Twitter: https://twitter.com/pranesh_prakash --iGhEg9CKxPjbxG5lRPrFbro60VNL8jtPG Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJUAW1uAAoJEFUPonS5l6Cps4sP+gK10RYNY18sDnubiLEAVLWf UAl+0Kqqk0hDaXtCSvyjW9kr81+1E7XcxQSb1LFOFNEblleHXDyyx62UaY8ssCad 7gJJMzfRILvoHzgrhb251jeBAh+JHXPlXeMW1aYlO4AmW8qR+PVeivv4sVBXKQEI v/RIaMofs+MUxVJ4dKF7CjczzgpMpLkvmivzdjbKMcLMYX9JieIkG5TmmIfju/ED FDOs24JHxD4YLmFF9AoxE8EjVmXrPZZS8wX3UejkmIleCwyWd6u9fqmntIEDzu3z it2+/FTF7+xfRvmmmaFv+ryVIyK/ayWeqEI3si2Px+oyrJp9MYkPD7CTQNXFTPKe 9JVCtAMnDvTpTLJ7488T/CnnL5PnYA/8y6UbZxtTsdahSGPv17+kMVQNaoB+t/Y3 UZK4wuuXSZdck7Rh5WWRsgGYcPASfDHL3Xp/V54MmkusBx94CRVRQhJuN+dG0UaF J9baV69VyuBudJKP6GpWT3hqNBDivsiyAE6B/byVqcQaq/4fSK+OxHK9q3Lk7Bxr a7Q/5JBitQnPBO+Be++V0JHlAZJwNei+gZNU5Iy1jpWf9II5xQdMsPKXNnmIpwua 3qBRvjgF0/HxIHIIpjyNLds0HEYywn6GAqWrpBCt9Z+X+JTrnwe/JPZC/uSh4JAw 7AP7J3tJRrt+0OfvF7l7 =7McL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --iGhEg9CKxPjbxG5lRPrFbro60VNL8jtPG-- From nobody Sat Aug 30 07:45:08 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: diversity@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C63FF1A0384 for ; Sat, 30 Aug 2014 07:45:06 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.688 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.688 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB=0.77, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.668, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01] autolearn=ham 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 ttTEuCPuhZvX for ; Sat, 30 Aug 2014 07:45:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B994A1A03E1 for ; Sat, 30 Aug 2014 07:45:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.224.145.129]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s7UEiRUQ028875 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 30 Aug 2014 07:44:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1409409881; x=1409496281; bh=NFdIYIy213OY9Xw3BxndVuN+a1HZNUmmoo42DU75FQs=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=rsSOPdnt7FoMmdXT4hg+pmIge+jgOrKltB5zV6ZhhXKvECJGWhXtlCcYEh+M8e4dG sMd+MotkZwgn6N6pNRKYvqqjV+Vo7Ii6BxZTEftQgQ3Wb+E5HiJtmxPHcsm1w8s7EW gszL/cWs5B6F1uYRMXJcU8nBL3VzL62XqfaFlg/k= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1409409881; x=1409496281; i=@elandsys.com; bh=NFdIYIy213OY9Xw3BxndVuN+a1HZNUmmoo42DU75FQs=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=A8q0r0lvnxSF1wg0aWeGxwV7NDGTHcogW4F/dIZ9LA/1qvW88m2RfP0kt/lvZkczE NngRTZuxdDFwYrTy9x5sJoc14dxKylv8KcT12AliZ9ESiy/LDgjoDgFoRCaklvASBn Nk7fYGL41SyYVVU5A+A2Z36sK7m1PISbP834/9wE= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20140830014849.0bc8b090@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2014 05:10:20 -0700 To: Pranesh Prakash From: S Moonesamy In-Reply-To: <54016D6E.9000606@cis-india.org> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20140826121923.0d615b68@elandnews.com> <54016D6E.9000606@cis-india.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/diversity/TzrOCe3CeX4KZM6qtneST0nMUkw Cc: diversity@ietf.org, Dave Crocker , Narelle Clark Subject: Re: [Diversity] draft-crocker-diversity-conduct-01 X-BeenThere: diversity@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Diversity open mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2014 14:45:06 -0000 Hi Pranesh, At 23:21 29-08-2014, Pranesh Prakash wrote: >How? I assume that it is random sampling where everyone stands an equal chance of being selected. >Exactly. I don't understand how you're squaring this with the >above. position. I have written a draft about the matter. It might explain my position. I am not thinking clearly enough to be able to provided a good answer to the question. Sorry about that. Regards, S. Moonesamy