From nobody Wed Dec 1 03:03:34 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietf.org Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A06B3A005F; Wed, 1 Dec 2021 03:03:28 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Robert Wilton via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: gendispatch-chairs@ietf.org, gendispatch@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.40.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Robert Wilton Message-ID: <163835660760.16598.13673275377460089178@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2021 03:03:28 -0800 Archived-At: Subject: [Gendispatch] Robert Wilton's No Objection on charter-ietf-gendispatch-01-00: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2021 11:03:29 -0000 Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-gendispatch-01-00: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-gendispatch/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I question whether AD sponsored documents should be discussed on the IETF discussion mailing list, or whether it would be better for those discussions to continue on the Gendispatch mailing (or an alternative open small mailing list)? It is certainly possible that some individuals who may be interested in participating in these drafts are subscribed to Gendispatch but choose not to be subscribed to the IETF discussion mailing list. From nobody Wed Dec 1 22:10:54 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietf.org Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33EE33A0AE5; Wed, 1 Dec 2021 22:10:35 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker To: "The IESG" Cc: gendispatch-chairs@ietf.org, gendispatch@ietf.org X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.40.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Benjamin Kaduk Message-ID: <163842543502.20877.4835523817199553759@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2021 22:10:35 -0800 Archived-At: Subject: [Gendispatch] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on charter-ietf-gendispatch-01-00: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2021 06:10:35 -0000 Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-gendispatch-01-00: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-gendispatch/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed new work may be deferred in cases where GENDISPATCH does not have enough information for the chairs to determine consensus. New work may be rejected in cases where there is not sufficient interest in GENDISPATCH or the proposal has been considered and rejected in the past, unless a substantially revised proposal is put forth, including compelling new reasons for accepting the work. Can work be rejected because the WG thinks it is a bad idea? (Is that supposed to be part of "not sufficient WG interest"?) The existence of GENDISPATCH does not change the IESG's responsibilities and discretion as described in RFC 3710. Work related to the IAB, IETF LLC, IRTF, and RFC Editor processes is out of scope. It's a little bit hard to square "out of scope" with a willingness to request that those bodies consider taking up work on a given topic. From nobody Thu Dec 2 07:33:16 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 173AB3A1186; Thu, 2 Dec 2021 07:33:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=episteme.net 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 uh4yqFmYajh4; Thu, 2 Dec 2021 07:33:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from helm.helm.episteme.net (helm.helm.episteme.net [209.51.32.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 134913A1185; Thu, 2 Dec 2021 07:33:03 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=episteme.net; s=mail; t=1638459182; bh=cB3EJRMlSq3IHnIPz4cm7qDECY5dljZP1THALn13QUQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=Kivme17fvbzRdXkwuRT/ocouRpzflmFKqDPpgWuHriNX4MfsS8GpQ3pSj7dA4SSDr RQVcDJV2sWLPWeYbRgOw98+2D67RhQWD7wdH3to2WJR38VFbh4Nz+RyH26OHMYvTVE SaILtiuBGqHhmOuBvFuQsf/PRDXYEnqM1TQ9fGco= From: Pete Resnick To: Benjamin Kaduk Cc: The IESG , gendispatch-chairs@ietf.org, gendispatch@ietf.org Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2021 09:33:01 -0600 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.14r5850) Message-ID: <01D32738-3C5B-4EB7-B0CF-33343C187969@episteme.net> In-Reply-To: <163842543502.20877.4835523817199553759@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <163842543502.20877.4835523817199553759@ietfa.amsl.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on charter-ietf-gendispatch-01-00: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2021 15:33:09 -0000 On 2 Dec 2021, at 0:10, Benjamin Kaduk via Datatracker wrote: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Proposed new work may be deferred in cases where GENDISPATCH does > not > have enough information for the chairs to determine consensus. New > work > may be rejected in cases where there is not sufficient interest in > GENDISPATCH or the proposal has been considered and rejected in > the > past, unless a substantially revised proposal is put forth, > including > compelling new reasons for accepting the work. > > Can work be rejected because the WG thinks it is a bad idea? (Is that > supposed to be part of "not sufficient WG interest"?) That has always been my assumption. > The existence of GENDISPATCH does not change the IESG's > responsibilities > and discretion as described in RFC 3710. Work related to the IAB, > IETF > LLC, IRTF, and RFC Editor processes is out of scope. > > It's a little bit hard to square "out of scope" with a willingness to > request that those bodies consider taking up work on a given topic. This might need some clarification: The distinction here is that proposals to change IAB, LLC, IRTF, or RFC Editor processes are not appropriate to bring to GENDISPATCH. However, proposals that seem like they might be appropriate for IETF work and are brought to GENDISPATCH can always be determined by the WG to be either (a) process changes to one of the aforementioned groups and therefore the proposer is pointed to the appropriate place; or (b) work that theoretically *could* be done at an IETF level but might be better handled by one of the other groups. For the latter, think of someone proposing a new document to update/replace section 7 of 2026 on external standards and specifications. After some discussion, GENDISPATCH decides that in order to work on the proposal, discussion really needs to be had with the IAB regarding their liaison role, and that discussion might end up changing the very nature of the update needed to 2026, or might even eliminate it. GENDISPATCH could dispatch the entire discussion to the IAB, and at a later date the IAB might come back and say, "Nothing for the IETF here" or "We're done; now IETF needs to update its documents." Does the current text need clarification to capture that? pr -- Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ All connections to the world are tenuous at best From nobody Thu Dec 2 10:57:50 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6C513A13E8; Thu, 2 Dec 2021 10:57:35 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=episteme.net 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 Qzd_2Zo-X2Uc; Thu, 2 Dec 2021 10:57:30 -0800 (PST) Received: from helm.helm.episteme.net (helm.helm.episteme.net [209.51.32.195]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE74D3A08C4; Thu, 2 Dec 2021 10:57:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=episteme.net; s=mail; t=1638471448; bh=b9QQntEcfSrS/MYRPT/czNLA+B5iprXebyD/k8lV1Lo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=J2DGu5fRHqV2/G0YyDE7OjwK+y9yP1qCCFZrQ/Uy+FAbMyz8cRXUncHWyRWrKjDmx 4wmFOgYHwlCU4aflwe8G00h+5wBMZTuKoEBX6hd+d+MU+ffFrz1dAtes+UbLp/G8Kj QV+so45uCEDJgRU3doWLi/jSDNfVQ8vzs9ZtGFoo= From: Pete Resnick To: Robert Wilton Cc: The IESG , gendispatch-chairs@ietf.org, gendispatch@ietf.org Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2021 12:57:27 -0600 X-Mailer: MailMate (1.14r5850) Message-ID: <0F1C4C64-1814-4471-B08F-0FB189DBBF73@episteme.net> In-Reply-To: <163835660760.16598.13673275377460089178@ietfa.amsl.com> References: <163835660760.16598.13673275377460089178@ietfa.amsl.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Robert Wilton's No Objection on charter-ietf-gendispatch-01-00: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 02 Dec 2021 18:57:36 -0000 On 1 Dec 2021, at 5:03, Robert Wilton via Datatracker wrote: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I question whether AD sponsored documents should be discussed on the > IETF > discussion mailing list, or whether it would be better for those > discussions to > continue on the Gendispatch mailing (or an alternative open small > mailing > list)? It is certainly possible that some individuals who may be > interested in > participating in these drafts are subscribed to Gendispatch but choose > not to > be subscribed to the IETF discussion mailing list. I will leave it to our AD to more completely address this, but moving discussions to GENDISPATCH would make this not a DISPATCH group but rather a standing GEN process change WG. Whatever else I think of that, I wouldn't volunteer to chair it. pr -- Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/ All connections to the world are tenuous at best From nobody Fri Dec 3 10:55:06 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietf.org Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FD343A00AF; Fri, 3 Dec 2021 10:55:00 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: The IESG To: "IETF-Announce" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.40.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Cc: gendispatch@ietf.org Reply-To: iesg@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <163855769969.31433.9138331865709979880@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2021 10:55:00 -0800 Archived-At: Subject: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatch (gendispatch) X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2021 18:55:00 -0000 The General Area Dispatch (gendispatch) WG in the General Area of the IETF is undergoing rechartering. The IESG has not made any determination yet. The following draft charter was submitted, and is provided for informational purposes only. Please send your comments to the IESG mailing list (iesg@ietf.org) by 2021-12-13. General Area Dispatch (gendispatch) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Current status: Active WG Chairs: Pete Resnick Kirsty Paine Assigned Area Director: Lars Eggert General Area Directors: Lars Eggert Mailing list: Address: gendispatch@ietf.org To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch Archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gendispatch/ Group page: https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/gendispatch/ Charter: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-gendispatch/ The GENDISPATCH working group is a DISPATCH-style working group (see RFC 7957) chartered to consider proposals for new work in the GEN area, including proposals for changes or improvements to the IETF process and process documents. GENDISPATCH is chartered to identify, or to help create, an appropriate venue for new work. GENDISPATCH will not consider any technical standardization work. Guiding principles for proposed new work include: 1. Providing a clear problem statement, historical context, motivation, and deliverables for the proposed new work. 2. Ensuring there has been adequate mailing list discussion reflecting sufficient interest, enough individuals have expressed a willingness to contribute (if appropriate given the subject matter of the proposal) and there is WG consensus before new work is dispatched. 3. Looking for and identifying commonalities and overlap among published or ongoing work in the GEN area, the IESG, the IAB, the IETF LLC, the IRTF, other SDOs, or the wider technical community. Options for handling new work include: - Directing the work to an existing WG. - Developing a proposal for a BOF. - Developing a charter for a new WG. - Making recommendations that documents be AD-sponsored (which ADs may or may not choose to follow). - Requesting that relevant bodies, including but not limited to the IESG, the IAB, the IRTF, or the IETF LLC, consider taking up the work in some form. - Deferring the decision for the new work. - Rejecting the new work. If GENDISPATCH decides that a particular topic needs to be addressed by a new WG, the normal IETF chartering process will be followed, including, for instance, IETF-wide review of the proposed charter. Proposals for large work efforts SHOULD lead to a BOF where the topic can be discussed in front of the entire IETF community. Documents progressed as AD-sponsored would typically include those that are extremely simple or make minor updates to existing process documents. Proposed new work may be deferred in cases where GENDISPATCH does not have enough information for the chairs to determine consensus. New work may be rejected in cases where there is not sufficient interest in GENDISPATCH or the proposal has been considered and rejected in the past, unless a substantially revised proposal is put forth, including compelling new reasons for accepting the work. A major objective of GENDISPATCH is to provide timely, clear dispositions of new efforts. Thus, where there is consensus to take on new work, GENDISPATCH will strive to quickly find a home for it (usually within a few months). While most new work in the GEN area is expected to be considered in GENDISPATCH, there may be times when that is not appropriate. At the discretion of the GEN AD, new efforts may follow other paths. For example, work may go directly to a BOF, may be initiated in other working groups when it clearly belongs in that group, or may be directly AD-sponsored. While it is inevitable that some discussion of the merits of a proposal brought to GENDISPATCH are necessary in order to evaluate the appropriate disposition of the proposal, GENDISPATCH is not chartered to actually do the work proposed. Full discussions of proposed work should take place where GENDISPATCH directs the work, whether that is in a WG or BOF, the IETF discussion list or Last Call list in the case of an AD-sponsored document, or in a forum designated by the relevant body to which the work was directed. The existence of GENDISPATCH does not change the IESG's responsibilities and discretion as described in RFC 3710. Work related to the IAB, IETF LLC, IRTF, and RFC Editor processes is out of scope. From nobody Fri Dec 3 11:45:20 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 079DF3A07DB; Fri, 3 Dec 2021 11:45:19 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.95 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.95 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.852, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cHIdzNuj_OPH; Fri, 3 Dec 2021 11:45:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pj1-x1032.google.com (mail-pj1-x1032.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1032]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA0513A07D8; Fri, 3 Dec 2021 11:45:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pj1-x1032.google.com with SMTP id gt5so3117319pjb.1; Fri, 03 Dec 2021 11:45:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=tRGbkuVuSCOeyek3IAguBT3JH8Z0LFbiZLWgbBenN8o=; b=Hu+rKhcoGJQmU7DpxzzTHJ5rQ9ueq5dbGJDkshrPusI6UqJFXZs+UIiQH1wpg+qzOz UYR8X1jANDE0CkxB4FOechpBFPIZDopvnD4CKNaqJ8+T3q3zmDl/0BFcdlg1F5LEOuvz rpjY6/BepbFH5495dVOQ7m40Ktx0BnXKOgyOfTJ2P9MFwzo2RcIfU3WeLkXj3PTWeHKk WhnHLQR8Kg2eh/iXb7Jt9vWG2EqzlVHaHxp4y20w9Y0QB8xjztRt/NEUCoW9nXNrsPvx Z95lFGY9Sd0lAUvaezsmqmkhJ+B3nNeHUtAawrJp3wOFfOuWspklc/QFOu8EiUJYjXFs wx1Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=tRGbkuVuSCOeyek3IAguBT3JH8Z0LFbiZLWgbBenN8o=; b=KyeHkjt3dGxaxE5getgCui2qSIDPdRxnUMtu0qnP31m0kp2feKJSIi4vB/m4vxmerh zchMEtTsB45wD1Vt73ZlfycqMQ2bBI38tHvgRopg0/GiTqX0TN1lAlloqeEc9blQqILR Iu+sMVOsdM2HZG3Y5xu/v/5gk5haq2I8dfFBXO5QW5jCDYNChVYnViQE5gEI9T9+eGPe Rc73dZgiPyspSkV5WZBsOjURsVowiTQyVF4DsVN1cK2JZ1DwE0Icg3AsCWRzwzY3w375 qwcEkRbWXzCP2SlesesRYfNENEoBIl71Zm50SOF8T2gWL9ZGJhi8oYKvTMfAPXM0Oo+p 64Sg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530+YySPIPCoiiylW0pEYoVwxw6Swz/mlQZQGL+rowZPHtXvIQtq OTwDdDf43Ki7zqJD1B3r8rq0BNnXoDWW1w== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxoHYF1A0zXXypiPVaAI4xd9vQ8rt9n5Cfu3FqNxNBbcvWBEuffEGWOSkxqnelbRE2/vk51cw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:eec5:b0:143:982a:85c with SMTP id h5-20020a170902eec500b00143982a085cmr24681373plb.66.1638560711227; Fri, 03 Dec 2021 11:45:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e003:102d:e801:80b2:5c79:2266:e431? ([2406:e003:102d:e801:80b2:5c79:2266:e431]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f21sm4864313pfc.191.2021.12.03.11.45.09 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 03 Dec 2021 11:45:10 -0800 (PST) To: iesg@ietf.org Cc: gendispatch@ietf.org References: <163855769969.31433.9138331865709979880@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Brian E Carpenter Message-ID: <613813a1-56f4-dfe0-4190-030f7fc62bbd@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2021 08:45:07 +1300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <163855769969.31433.9138331865709979880@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatch (gendispatch) X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2021 19:45:19 -0000 > Work related to the IAB, IETF LLC, IRTF, > and RFC Editor processes is out of scope. Hang on... does that mean that any proposal to update BCP101 is out of scope? That can't be right. I assume this is intended to make IETF LLC internal procedures out of scope, but in that case the statement is too general. Regards Brian Carpenter On 04-Dec-21 07:55, The IESG wrote: > The General Area Dispatch (gendispatch) WG in the General Area of the IETF is > undergoing rechartering. The IESG has not made any determination yet. The > following draft charter was submitted, and is provided for informational > purposes only. Please send your comments to the IESG mailing list > (iesg@ietf.org) by 2021-12-13. > > General Area Dispatch (gendispatch) > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > Current status: Active WG > > Chairs: > Pete Resnick > Kirsty Paine > > Assigned Area Director: > Lars Eggert > > General Area Directors: > Lars Eggert > > Mailing list: > Address: gendispatch@ietf.org > To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch > Archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gendispatch/ > > Group page: https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/gendispatch/ > > Charter: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-gendispatch/ > > The GENDISPATCH working group is a DISPATCH-style working group (see RFC 7957) > chartered to consider proposals for new work in the GEN area, including > proposals for changes or improvements to the IETF process and process > documents. GENDISPATCH is chartered to identify, or to help create, an > appropriate venue for new work. GENDISPATCH will not consider any technical > standardization work. > > Guiding principles for proposed new work include: > > 1. Providing a clear problem statement, historical context, motivation, and > deliverables for the proposed new work. > > 2. Ensuring there has been adequate mailing list discussion reflecting > sufficient interest, enough individuals have expressed a willingness to > contribute (if appropriate given the subject matter of the proposal) and > there is WG consensus before new work is dispatched. > > 3. Looking for and identifying commonalities and overlap among published or > ongoing work in the GEN area, the IESG, the IAB, the IETF LLC, the IRTF, > other SDOs, or the wider technical community. > > Options for handling new work include: > > - Directing the work to an existing WG. > > - Developing a proposal for a BOF. > > - Developing a charter for a new WG. > > - Making recommendations that documents be AD-sponsored (which ADs may or may > not choose to follow). > > - Requesting that relevant bodies, including but not limited to the IESG, the > IAB, the IRTF, or the IETF LLC, consider taking up the work in some form. > > - Deferring the decision for the new work. > > - Rejecting the new work. > > If GENDISPATCH decides that a particular topic needs to be addressed by a new > WG, the normal IETF chartering process will be followed, including, for > instance, IETF-wide review of the proposed charter. Proposals for large work > efforts SHOULD lead to a BOF where the topic can be discussed in front of the > entire IETF community. Documents progressed as AD-sponsored would typically > include those that are extremely simple or make minor updates to existing > process documents. > > Proposed new work may be deferred in cases where GENDISPATCH does not have > enough information for the chairs to determine consensus. New work may be > rejected in cases where there is not sufficient interest in GENDISPATCH or the > proposal has been considered and rejected in the past, unless a substantially > revised proposal is put forth, including compelling new reasons for accepting > the work. > > A major objective of GENDISPATCH is to provide timely, clear dispositions of > new efforts. Thus, where there is consensus to take on new work, GENDISPATCH > will strive to quickly find a home for it (usually within a few months). > While most new work in the GEN area is expected to be considered in > GENDISPATCH, there may be times when that is not appropriate. At the > discretion of the GEN AD, new efforts may follow other paths. For example, > work may go directly to a BOF, may be initiated in other working groups when > it clearly belongs in that group, or may be directly AD-sponsored. > > While it is inevitable that some discussion of the merits of a proposal > brought to GENDISPATCH are necessary in order to evaluate the appropriate > disposition of the proposal, GENDISPATCH is not chartered to actually do the > work proposed. Full discussions of proposed work should take place where > GENDISPATCH directs the work, whether that is in a WG or BOF, the IETF > discussion list or Last Call list in the case of an AD-sponsored document, or > in a forum designated by the relevant body to which the work was directed. > > The existence of GENDISPATCH does not change the IESG's responsibilities and > discretion as described in RFC 3710. Work related to the IAB, IETF LLC, IRTF, > and RFC Editor processes is out of scope. > > > > From nobody Tue Dec 7 06:10:12 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3C4F53A1658 for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 06:10:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 1.237 X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.237 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS=3.335, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Yh_88qXFTTvJ for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 06:10:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailb2.tigertech.net (mailb2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.154]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A79EE3A164B for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 06:10:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4J7hyM6KL0z1pKqh for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 06:10:03 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1638886203; bh=d9lOBHg/oYW21AUnR28S9WXrdWSMDWPuYyOka/cA6As=; h=Date:Subject:References:To:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=jnzQGpP4YUXTeSWmhsand9xJ5AHqu/KofYyVKspzPdWEBOxJIN/5r1/DpqB3NTmgF KKkfvjOcAynXpIKzwopJ+Us1/ZKOwaituaxLm17uF4G3faBNp7B7AbU481rddBngvo 0Vhsrqde15QZAI/4ihh3i3nBa2iSNi4CCvKBOjoc= X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at b2.tigertech.net Received: from [192.168.22.111] (50-233-136-230-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [50.233.136.230]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4J7hyM3PGJz1ntly for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 06:10:03 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2021 09:10:01 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.3.2 References: <163888571249.24497.10936065060790920242@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Language: en-US To: "gendispatch@ietf.org" From: "Joel M. Halpern" In-Reply-To: <163888571249.24497.10936065060790920242@ietfa.amsl.com> X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <163888571249.24497.10936065060790920242@ietfa.amsl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: [Gendispatch] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2021 14:10:09 -0000 After teh discussion at the IETF meeting, and after further discussion of the legal aspects, we have made a major revision to the document. It is shorter, and more direct. I presume some folks will dislike it even more, and some folks will find that it addresses their concerns. Please speak up, so that we can decide if this time the chairs may be able to dispatch the draft. Thank you, Joel (and Jay and Brad) -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02.txt Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2021 06:01:52 -0800 From: internet-drafts@ietf.org Reply-To: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. Title : Antitrust Guidelines for IETF Particiants Authors : Joel M. Halpern Brad Biddle Jay Daley Filename : draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02.txt Pages : 6 Date : 2021-12-07 Abstract: This document specifies policy for IETF participants on compliance with antitrust laws and how to reduce antitrust risks in connection with IETF activities. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust/ There is also an HTML version available at: https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02.html A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02 Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts _______________________________________________ I-D-Announce mailing list I-D-Announce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt From nobody Tue Dec 7 06:48:57 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E5023A16A7 for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 06:48:55 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.8 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.701, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SnCW1bB6MKFC for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 06:48:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9005:57f::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E4B0A3A16A6 for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 06:48:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0122330.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with ESMTP id 1B79i1xR012454; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 14:48:47 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=zbJs1eNPL/PP1OOvALLTGG8CY+6+Gs376HpuyBSlY/8=; b=l71664RbPYyH2YOcKqfe7GpoEiAydtebHqSFrDae3AcRO3SY/0z+nWt3ZlqA7rkcVfdJ PzDvlM4Fb1ctO9S2njs1NSaqVNe1mmrFSYxDyCh8JvzSPokoKONQhdrRRHMUWhlLsEEl LXLvffXlFEEEqWQfNxM31cbpCwKEPzADyZxc3+9NkR3hrDk4dNudkeEEnAobL3toK18g sGA2WOCAdQt7bifgQnV2FvC9c6I2Ie670Sl4LoVuuTd9OjaAhgWxcOJi7JMfIvgaFn31 GWxQ1FIfcFTaRUXtlnDLaEgr+NqWQpBuxhUQHZZI7OFAsv9syoIZmtDX760ot54sxEq1 Lg== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint1 (prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com [184.51.33.18] (may be forged)) by mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3cssjb4xhq-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 07 Dec 2021 14:48:47 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 1B7EL2sg028386; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 09:48:46 -0500 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.33]) by prod-mail-ppoint1.akamai.com with ESMTP id 3cr4j3mptt-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 07 Dec 2021 09:48:46 -0500 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb3.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.103) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.26; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 09:48:46 -0500 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.026; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 09:48:45 -0500 From: "Salz, Rich" To: "Joel M. Halpern" , "gendispatch@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Gendispatch] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02.txt Thread-Index: AQHX63QqfxeCDDnruUqofsBbBWHAsqwnHCgA Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2021 14:48:45 +0000 Message-ID: References: <163888571249.24497.10936065060790920242@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.56.21120200 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.27.164.43] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: <78BAC08F0398A34C8575A42C08942A08@akamai.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.425, 18.0.790 definitions=2021-12-07_03:2021-12-06, 2021-12-07 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=902 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2110150000 definitions=main-2112070087 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: G6FzUKdPWlq2c6kZTwM_e40nOjzoOM-V X-Proofpoint-GUID: G6FzUKdPWlq2c6kZTwM_e40nOjzoOM-V X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.790,Hydra:6.0.425,FMLib:17.11.62.513 definitions=2021-12-07_06,2021-12-06_02,2021-12-02_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 bulkscore=0 priorityscore=1501 mlxlogscore=918 clxscore=1011 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 spamscore=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2110150000 definitions=main-2112070089 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2021 14:48:55 -0000 SSBsaWtlIHRoaXMgdmVyc2lvbiwgdGhhbmtzIHRvIHlvdSBhbmQgdGhlIGF1dGhvcnMgZm9yIHRo ZSByZXZpc2lvbnMuDQoNCkkgaGF2ZSBhIHF1ZXN0aW9uLCB3aGljaCBzaG91bGRuJ3QgYWZmZWN0 IHRoZSBkaXNwYXRjaCBvZiB0aGUgZG9jdW1lbnQuICBJbiBzZWN0aW9uIDYsIGFyZSB0aG9zZSBj aGFubmVscyBpbiBhIHBhcnRpY3VsYXIgb3JkZXIsIG9yIGlzIGl0ICJwaWNrIGFueSAob25lIG9y IG1vcmU/KSBvZiB0aGVzZSIgb3Igc29tZXRoaW5nIGVsc2U/DQoNCg0K From nobody Tue Dec 7 07:23:55 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 860953A09F3 for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 07:23:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.615 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.615 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.852, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS=3.335, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=joelhalpern.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id MWuyog5MpVhb for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 07:23:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from mailb2.tigertech.net (mailb2.tigertech.net [208.80.4.154]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B400F3A0815 for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 07:23:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4J7kbT2TDzz1pKqr; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 07:23:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=joelhalpern.com; s=2.tigertech; t=1638890629; bh=84/v2T1JTyL8I2vV7UcizTsdbIFKsLKI4w4WIQH7tNg=; h=Date:Subject:To:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=qzKTa8Do3WvaAAtbBzKEXeDnKaa7nm41Xl2RYEez3yN/He3x+yawEIFas7POA/b/M S65Cm2PdEsX84VYMOcphveQF+PsfTx8hkIIpfV5rHxRbQAPyHcoBXzTeYU05HfduyU OqIzT9WoBwUQOSUkNj04pSS37D16Lpcs9TMw0v8g= X-Quarantine-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at b2.tigertech.net Received: from [192.168.22.111] (50-233-136-230-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net [50.233.136.230]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mailb2.tigertech.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4J7kbS5PjRz1pKqP; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 07:23:48 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <6cdf82b3-a0b2-bc43-5a96-668c95efd977@joelhalpern.com> Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2021 10:23:45 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.3.2 Content-Language: en-US To: "Salz, Rich" , "gendispatch@ietf.org" References: <163888571249.24497.10936065060790920242@ietfa.amsl.com> From: "Joel M. Halpern" In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:23:54 -0000 Thanks Rich. On the choices of channel, I have not checked with my co-authors. As far as I know, it is up to the person looking to make the report. And probably varies based on the circumstances as to which would be "best" if it were possible to tell. Yours, Joel On 12/7/2021 9:48 AM, Salz, Rich wrote: > I like this version, thanks to you and the authors for the revisions. > > I have a question, which shouldn't affect the dispatch of the document. In section 6, are those channels in a particular order, or is it "pick any (one or more?) of these" or something else? > > From nobody Tue Dec 7 07:32:47 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91DB73A08E3 for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 07:32:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.8 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.701, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kou3RTCMSaDG for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 07:32:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9005:57f::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44BC73A08BC for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 07:32:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0122331.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with ESMTP id 1B7CMi86024025; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 15:32:38 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-id : content-transfer-encoding : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=ClRBXdAf62OhvLHx/9lFXq0BONFDSfodKsfUmCjlAYo=; b=g/3GB3QNy2BQ672+p5eSuQoLtfUdyl9sFC0UpeJYfhTpzRqu831ypVMRXlADKcbaNb1l +TShBlo28aEMcHv1h9NWFbA4m2Grft6XTJyfNqPZLcD6rHet9PTAwzg/nT26X5YgGU44 CPnbdea6N0J47oPww/K6xNOK949Vc9bljYyU00YbSZqeXHBn/hZg+P0bc+g+mA4an4dI PoCN8/nuXSh6DNiqw1OoRNbLAnAJ0nZ+ho891VI22+y+DDYlb65FfFhtwIC0c7RfTnkM gu2wdN6D6dvVUDsB95Ghaprfc4xvloVX9Hrb3lXDopmngDyNPbgpxi9dq3970T0bXr4Z iA== Received: from prod-mail-ppoint5 (prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com [184.51.33.60] (may be forged)) by mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3csv4m2y01-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:32:38 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com (8.16.1.2/8.16.1.2) with SMTP id 1B7FJsah015812; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 07:32:37 -0800 Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.30]) by prod-mail-ppoint5.akamai.com with ESMTP id 3cr76evjsm-2 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 07 Dec 2021 07:32:37 -0800 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.101) by usma1ex-dag1mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.123.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1497.26; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 10:32:22 -0500 Received: from USMA1EX-DAG1MB1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) by usma1ex-dag1mb1.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.123.101]) with mapi id 15.00.1497.026; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 10:32:22 -0500 From: "Salz, Rich" To: "Joel M. Halpern" , "gendispatch@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [Gendispatch] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02.txt Thread-Index: AQHX63QqfxeCDDnruUqofsBbBWHAsqwnHCgAgABdmoD//66VgA== Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2021 15:32:21 +0000 Message-ID: References: <163888571249.24497.10936065060790920242@ietfa.amsl.com> <6cdf82b3-a0b2-bc43-5a96-668c95efd977@joelhalpern.com> In-Reply-To: <6cdf82b3-a0b2-bc43-5a96-668c95efd977@joelhalpern.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.56.21120200 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted x-originating-ip: [172.27.164.43] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.425, 18.0.790 definitions=2021-12-07_03:2021-12-06, 2021-12-07 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 bulkscore=0 mlxscore=0 adultscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=667 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2110150000 definitions=main-2112070093 X-Proofpoint-GUID: VaVAtgQgpkJDluf3Tuv0Cp6KKgXaTiaq X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: VaVAtgQgpkJDluf3Tuv0Cp6KKgXaTiaq X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.205,Aquarius:18.0.790,Hydra:6.0.425,FMLib:17.11.62.513 definitions=2021-12-07_06,2021-12-06_02,2021-12-02_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 suspectscore=0 mlxlogscore=683 phishscore=0 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 clxscore=1015 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2110150000 definitions=main-2112070095 Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:32:46 -0000 SSBhZ3JlZSBpdCB3aWxsIGRlcGVuZCBvbiBjb250ZXh0LCBzbyBJIHN1Z2dlc3QgYWRkaW5nICJv bmUgb3IgbW9yZSBvZiB0aGUgZm9sbG93aW5nIiBiZWZvcmUgdGhlIGxpc3QuICBCdXQgYXMgSSBz YWlkLCBpdCBjYW4gd2FpdC4NCg0K From nobody Tue Dec 7 07:50:45 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BEE93A16D6; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 07:50:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id bztWLpOzfdpU; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 07:50:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [91.190.195.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46B1F3A0ACC; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 07:50:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:3164:1d35:c658:6f62]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 27297601B37; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 17:50:33 +0200 (EET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1638892233; bh=utHVmtoYRbTNbL6VqrD1LbY6w4ti0pkD5M1zAGMOZdM=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=WMhkn5kW5DyPAvGN7VrK7S6uiqF0qjo6Wfg9hMJFbAd28eLACDVdcRStWT4ekpYW1 HwctP1mKdo+oWGhNBtxtpBNPpi137IkJZbHpOIx1GLX8SU9yYhyWtWKmDDoP5vRtdO E/m0GyHgnbYiCM0m0o7fu+qRp5FmArmad5NAqOfQ= Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_7F6A44C3-6987-40C9-B8DC-C805EA04EFE9"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.20.0.1.32\)) From: Lars Eggert In-Reply-To: <613813a1-56f4-dfe0-4190-030f7fc62bbd@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 7 Dec 2021 17:50:32 +0200 Cc: iesg@ietf.org, gendispatch@ietf.org Message-Id: References: <163855769969.31433.9138331865709979880@ietfa.amsl.com> <613813a1-56f4-dfe0-4190-030f7fc62bbd@gmail.com> To: Brian E Carpenter X-MailScanner-ID: 27297601B37.AF626 X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatch (gendispatch) X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2021 15:50:44 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_7F6A44C3-6987-40C9-B8DC-C805EA04EFE9 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi, On 2021-12-3, at 21:45, Brian E Carpenter = wrote: >=20 >> Work related to the IAB, IETF LLC, IRTF, >> and RFC Editor processes is out of scope. >=20 > Hang on... does that mean that any proposal to update BCP101 is out of = scope? > That can't be right. I assume this is intended to make IETF LLC = internal > procedures out of scope, but in that case the statement is too = general. that text already exists in the current charter, FWIW, and wasn't = changed. I think this is not only about LLC internal procedures, but also many = other topics which are under the control of the named bodies. Do you = have a suggestion for how to rephrase that? (As for updates to BCP101, I could see "bugfix" revisions be done via = gendispatch, but anything major would likelt require a new WG. Thanks, Lars --Apple-Mail=_7F6A44C3-6987-40C9-B8DC-C805EA04EFE9 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEmpq0ZpSoejRmyhheVLXDCb9wwVcFAmGvgsgACgkQVLXDCb9w wVdwhRAAvluFV8GbC4KbPxmjYI9ZC2h9Wpw8s87kLbIo4WiUe6Gb/nI/Op48U6nO r6Px5fRUZkiD+eLLT/AfhovSSiz0p+AtkkD3JSWNHhKvlBf2x1LFT13gEttJxghn aFF0KDEpuTXaryLsO3PozSNWRQtClamgr4XCyO1x3EqmtPP8/3Pz6yURiMmNSP92 KWZITtcg03HE09iPvEIaWrZV1i/FgdvcnZbvddX4JN6NmvUs2MI+YxkzVOHQWQ5M Xva7vKGH2XvwoX5JQBs1bErNrxuPqScUn5Mmzr0CulmROr1nQ4zQJAHQo6sDrguO 3r6msLDb6HEz8M5LViyc9UhdG3KrJPqJXJMO5pIkcHoR4vrEnF+GmNoioyl115QR VqOM1m45nCVOyj39sp4R4SMRm7l5HPF5qGSown9ZtGxYRsDvqmBpK0O3Ms1nlNq2 KwxIkHA6Ieg5yThjmY2Kt/jECWrVckSkgLlOBvvE3M+7htzd4vDaQxhAK6/VMo5z aywUFQ3eg/M3xubQUtq2kLTCNogYL2WQIq5cvPn49yUPj5UlLKtOTfe2B8gXuRpU N5KgacuJ0nkK34aLkEb+5Os0vBBW80gQBGXJYkcehZljGm+sh54PYuXgtJS7YG0A iExkcD91fM6HxkZhNwTrENsWlK4e1qnqK0mhe0pGRHCILafUOgY= =k9qZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_7F6A44C3-6987-40C9-B8DC-C805EA04EFE9-- From nobody Tue Dec 7 18:08:19 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF7613A07EF; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 18:07:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.951 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.951 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.852, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WmdK-Kg_goVm; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 18:07:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pg1-x533.google.com (mail-pg1-x533.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::533]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14ABA3A07ED; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 18:07:57 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pg1-x533.google.com with SMTP id r5so739138pgi.6; Tue, 07 Dec 2021 18:07:56 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=qP2YTKS5KnFwqR0xe9w/mkFEgPdYI2EqgX444Wr03Zk=; b=VYe6tBO1HukSyW3jjlfclUOJWgY90a8cqNijgCBnbEVGcBBb4jwLIObkyqiAETi0zi GyExT+3X7zTfyYZswYx5UBcR16jQ5Z3k8c7pSLtxqtQuzTEy9Rj8GF1YpIJrET51gUbC Zrfc9PDmW7uNXIXHLFDPtsUBao8DdNe9vNBojohlGo4E3S9BAGFulIZgjNQyi8f3Q0IE d2yM3ZyTMZIFh2ZAO0EIRDgUGEZ2OWxTLo0ZTxS8i+yYKtinBOPU0j0H9lwDDUSokq3P Xi+NKqQS5dLXWx88cH7iC/WivnLfPZeMgA2jv2p6UU5Io+d7jjFkp6i/F0OFp+RCl18S /jhA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=qP2YTKS5KnFwqR0xe9w/mkFEgPdYI2EqgX444Wr03Zk=; b=U92fWdDBjj8X30bEAu7uHrsPVlH4SGJsDeOljXlQSG+sv6St62NMrY2XqwAU5J2BHd CFuSYORUtaFt5bASBFRUr+AGsc/ovnt7eTtPUACdz/cCt9XNBp0OeK/JrDJcwsPcLmXk 3Q8uouvmzVrpekfH7mF4V+Yj4Fl90nZfMLspew6qIdN7bgzFTFWfQ0qj/96W53utqFj4 TSkIVm83e/UH4Vd5K/1r73vDS0ntA8oL+rNLwyl5uD3Qv81bDG6Z4jqJXI9ewu+D6pFr ztea2UnkXC3B6V59MxUpnCAah2m+OkWQR/YcPCnFw0w890F6kd+D3TClZdAMJA3eBs5v lGrQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532TqiIhBciDmeOGN8V8rBJgTDAj6cRdRYe4MGXi1iFvpCoB6HdS nd+Mr2vBW3VxX3Gl7D4K9verCtV5jedxgA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxI4hW6RbxU9jUZwWGLJhikheuqlv1ZEy7+u4QhgDJ3TJmmYD1aPQMrRx8luTZU0iGhgGfmlA== X-Received: by 2002:a63:135a:: with SMTP id 26mr26977424pgt.87.1638929274506; Tue, 07 Dec 2021 18:07:54 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e003:102d:e801:80b2:5c79:2266:e431? ([2406:e003:102d:e801:80b2:5c79:2266:e431]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f19sm1105552pfv.76.2021.12.07.18.07.52 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 07 Dec 2021 18:07:53 -0800 (PST) To: Lars Eggert Cc: iesg@ietf.org, gendispatch@ietf.org References: <163855769969.31433.9138331865709979880@ietfa.amsl.com> <613813a1-56f4-dfe0-4190-030f7fc62bbd@gmail.com> From: Brian E Carpenter Message-ID: Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2021 15:07:50 +1300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatch (gendispatch) X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2021 02:08:00 -0000 Hi Lars, On 08-Dec-21 04:50, Lars Eggert wrote: > Hi, > > On 2021-12-3, at 21:45, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >> >>> Work related to the IAB, IETF LLC, IRTF, >>> and RFC Editor processes is out of scope. >> >> Hang on... does that mean that any proposal to update BCP101 is out of scope? >> That can't be right. I assume this is intended to make IETF LLC internal >> procedures out of scope, but in that case the statement is too general. > > that text already exists in the current charter, FWIW, and wasn't changed. It *has* been changed. The existing charter says: "Work related to the IAB, IRTF, and RFC Editor processes is out of scope." The proposed update says: "Work related to the IAB, IETF LLC, IRTF, and RFC Editor processes is out of scope." The old version is quite correct: the IETF has no control over IAB, IRTF and RFC Editor processes. But that does not apply to the LLC, which is *our* service performing a role that the IETF defined in the first place, in BCP 101. I cannot see how that is out of scope. > I think this is not only about LLC internal procedures, but also many other topics which are under the control of the named bodies. Do you have a suggestion for how to rephrase that? Just revert to the previous text. > (As for updates to BCP101, I could see "bugfix" revisions be done via gendispatch, but anything major would likelt require a new WG. Absolutely, especially if there was ever a serious proposal to update the role or constitution of the LLC. But draft-somebody-gendispatch-bcp101update might well be the starting point. Regards Brian > Thanks, > Lars > > > From nobody Tue Dec 7 18:39:53 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 702283A082A for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 18:39:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.95 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.95 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.852, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id x05Ud-pIWVjf for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 18:39:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pj1-x102d.google.com (mail-pj1-x102d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3275C3A0829 for ; Tue, 7 Dec 2021 18:39:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pj1-x102d.google.com with SMTP id j6-20020a17090a588600b001a78a5ce46aso3368780pji.0 for ; Tue, 07 Dec 2021 18:39:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6z0uJC2FdQDkwpQdO2OIUH/FthpYeCgSjfW+a71rWQA=; b=qdyawlWpxuwNKtRNacVS/FsnBR31cyvbosrXw7zTcx03Gcrn0JU8uShmFZYswHaBsC 0gzIDLixzpdgVvTjC+rQ+Xq4SIJevgGdPsv89DFtX37fWl5jkxW5hSJGJiR87skrI3i+ wNtuRdiNfCjo4cYNiUsFhuSSNj//Rak++lmXGfxXOwvlsJ2j9aCWi53My96Qm4F43s6Y m3Cjq8eUwqEDZ8mikE4mO7rQsQPa/qLWZ6RsfCKb2yA0UkCGA/qdFtrGOe031Sz2O6vl wblLfucWEe+YoQRMq2ejgpQkp+pdpFkKX2E0RoOyKdUOp+nAdKtlZ9+R32yP2YZzNwKt oy4w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=6z0uJC2FdQDkwpQdO2OIUH/FthpYeCgSjfW+a71rWQA=; b=LyS/DaYgtVNQlJya93/g3cVV8lNKi70tU35hz+MaVvEkVvFadfGaOYaB3UZTZrnK4q uZP020u3zDnrb1T6zLXP5qgFU01+v0c9tEnXVRwwmRZcO3WxaPL5DJQiY/XKhDrGR8/r Y68RIsa+7So9hSRm1aySgCHELNQRczLsWTNcz79+Rmp0Txh/wy9fnWl2/CxOcUY3v+I4 cMGnpU8IxdJv3wFBn3NfGHFKy/yCyKVvTeBgIj5ik/1fXr+l9r3kUv1mp7TvijvVaptY g9LgUEYUUm7m4erDYDB2LoOOEKTkn6t2p+0HQvy3IeVgg9gu9+ohxMnUSQ+lJ68Z9RfD H+bA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532XhHlHBu2YWG99lN0WBfULtOKnYdnofUYMcrA/9FizitWzAd7G 47PrYoehYq6xO73nnr9ouzJ1PTJk9SgxIA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy3m83x75HPJQDHNP+VE3KHgFmgXwB1zmVT9CsXPsdRtwKVzAkIN9Ktgf+JF2ma/kxnGiffhA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:f184:: with SMTP id bv4mr3849113pjb.80.1638931182524; Tue, 07 Dec 2021 18:39:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e003:102d:e801:80b2:5c79:2266:e431? ([2406:e003:102d:e801:80b2:5c79:2266:e431]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w37sm720903pgk.87.2021.12.07.18.39.40 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 07 Dec 2021 18:39:41 -0800 (PST) To: "Joel M. Halpern" , "gendispatch@ietf.org" References: <163888571249.24497.10936065060790920242@ietfa.amsl.com> From: Brian E Carpenter Message-ID: Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2021 15:39:38 +1300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2021 02:39:49 -0000 I liked the positioning of the previous version, because it was informative, but I disliked the fact that it was intended to be a BCP for no good reason. I certainly had several issues with the informative text that has now disappeared, but those all seemed to be fixable. I dislike this version because it is less informative, and because it is *really* pointless to tell people that they have to obey the law, especially if you don't help them to understand what the law might be. For most IETF participants, this will just be a click-through item, whereas they could read the previous draft and learn something. Is there a legal theory that this document saying "thou shalt obey the law" protects the IETF itself? If so, that might be a reason for proceeding. Otherwise, I'm not sure what value it has. Regards Brian Carpenter On 08-Dec-21 03:10, Joel M. Halpern wrote: > After teh discussion at the IETF meeting, and after further discussion > of the legal aspects, we have made a major revision to the document. It > is shorter, and more direct. > > I presume some folks will dislike it even more, and some folks will find > that it addresses their concerns. Please speak up, so that we can > decide if this time the chairs may be able to dispatch the draft. > > Thank you, > Joel (and Jay and Brad) > > > -------- Forwarded Message -------- > Subject: I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02.txt > Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2021 06:01:52 -0800 > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org > Reply-To: internet-drafts@ietf.org > To: i-d-announce@ietf.org > > > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts > directories. > > > Title : Antitrust Guidelines for IETF Particiants > Authors : Joel M. Halpern > Brad Biddle > Jay Daley > Filename : draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02.txt > Pages : 6 > Date : 2021-12-07 > > Abstract: > This document specifies policy for IETF participants on compliance > with antitrust laws and how to reduce antitrust risks in connection > with IETF activities. > > > The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust/ > > There is also an HTML version available at: > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02.html > > A diff from the previous version is available at: > https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02 > > > Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at > rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts > > > _______________________________________________ > I-D-Announce mailing list > I-D-Announce@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce > Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html > or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt > From nobody Wed Dec 8 03:23:20 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0C633A011F; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 03:23:13 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sRbXqiuFa-TB; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 03:23:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:211:32ff:fe22:186f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 57BAF3A00F7; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 03:23:09 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:3164:1d35:c658:6f62]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0F83E601E10; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 13:23:02 +0200 (EET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1638962582; bh=hQr7OAwDahhIsCOQpeECkNqnZiX+XjVGOD0JfIsoN7U=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=O8stM8RRPw2tPekPwlzwMdCMKHB7Q6FcfO+Wsf3dlKNgqzaGEshrTZfDnLBxpr58N +NzrkAwEo6Blm4v9fOtICmrg9BydXRqoeM/FjJGqXqrWM+G48YqfXq0kuZp+tuX5Rd B3AQDYHQH5AD5v9OHCqBPQcO3Q0v335boGbRXYMw= Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_64D6B769-AA7F-466D-A226-19BD22EE055A"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.20.0.1.32\)) From: Lars Eggert In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2021 13:23:00 +0200 Cc: gendispatch@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org Message-Id: References: <163855769969.31433.9138331865709979880@ietfa.amsl.com> <613813a1-56f4-dfe0-4190-030f7fc62bbd@gmail.com> To: Brian E Carpenter X-MailScanner-ID: 0F83E601E10.A7713 X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatch (gendispatch) X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2021 11:23:14 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_64D6B769-AA7F-466D-A226-19BD22EE055A Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi, On 2021-12-8, at 4:07, Brian E Carpenter = wrote: > It *has* been changed. The existing charter says: > "Work related to the IAB, IRTF, and RFC Editor processes is out of = scope." > The proposed update says: > "Work related to the IAB, IETF LLC, IRTF, and RFC Editor processes is = out of scope." ah - I get it now. Sorry for misreading. Yes, I think reverting that to the original text is fine. Thanks, Lars --Apple-Mail=_64D6B769-AA7F-466D-A226-19BD22EE055A Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEmpq0ZpSoejRmyhheVLXDCb9wwVcFAmGwlZQACgkQVLXDCb9w wVfOlw//fPyGKbDZeJO0PchHoR9wBHLhboCaekbWSNh23Tcd57DMfOLfKNjy1uMN rfsfYzah3l/FfmFYqDV43CMgcGDKpETEXEiXCVxRRJ7c/ovBUw1cWGycpGmmumFU 9s05+u9L6uGFQwm3rTrqjiyOUvzkpPDF6+3GRswZxvfwAhRCzJS+JpyqwIUE6iH7 YKJUJDJTnnOecgD3/HLI1nKfdwTUccNU/f9+0pxcuxhmE/gu2V2Hld3Sylah+chX 27MQSJnB+h8IYbyUs155C7FNxREd8cAgJBDkwnWKV7l5douiTJW+vCsnepSt+kWX I5Ij+oEnhxyBU3RbJrDTcm9XjuyjC7nVSs8k2QPLRDJ0WI5CFXPs2KnX6b2YPkL6 4zNHX9KWpg77uBEddMFYg3l+aUxbY33pOv1v011B6/TKkcFY0RzahXhklg/LWBDE Vm8Vls5powH+6rh1HRTGJApZLQo15we1Jm3y+/wUp7VjErPT9ACJhlYJwCRhfC+S 7oOp+8H/yFo8hkiYQvYr3F+Otj16URHJve1B0VmB3W9TMSwuCWGeZFOVbpSBsNMu lDzuiVTVedxsKq/nh2E9ctkqySfsvNe5GbiXgigpArX6Ubh66d2Rc7HdnES/ifmK fHB8aNaYBjUa8/uYG4Xtyyyib4PASsuqmXcbfYyXX+K1Dha4Cbc= =5Hxz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_64D6B769-AA7F-466D-A226-19BD22EE055A-- From nobody Wed Dec 8 14:57:01 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FAFF3A07E4 for ; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 14:56:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.697 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.697 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Wg7CLieeu_zH for ; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 14:56:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4714A3A07E3 for ; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 14:56:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from DESKTOP-K6V9C2L.elandsys.com ([102.116.29.192]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id 1B8MucFS009927 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 8 Dec 2021 14:56:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1639004210; x=1639090610; i=@elandsys.com; bh=1dkhkozKHBcLEPCO/St6EgTTyNkfo8EQdIfqwurhHTw=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=q6gPBo0BFkLm7v7FrugeS/eOJdBDbIsDCtWWweB2rPuBtvkz15qvphzcqcmu0wezU xB3FGwnbP4hojkD50LCItL5R9iOTWHreWQdeMJ1O7++5K/2y+zOmp9BM4God4m43F9 3WWepdfwxscK1rXGIYMaiGwB6p81ZMFKaLEccCWE= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20211208144553.0b318fd8@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2021 14:52:28 -0800 To: Mark Nottingham , gendispatch@ietf.org From: S Moonesamy In-Reply-To: References: <163595251682.11706.5053299985084837548@ietfa.amsl.com> <8854c3cc-694b-1a7f-ebc8-47bed9bb4e0f@joelhalpern.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-01.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Dec 2021 22:56:59 -0000 Hi Mark, At 03:19 PM 22-11-2021, Mark Nottingham wrote: >Thanks, Brad. I think this is the right framing, FWIW. > >Related but tangental question: Does the IETF have any particular >reason for not opting into protection under the Standards Developing >Organization Act of 2004 in the US? Last time I looked at the >Federal Register, we were nowhere to be seen... Was there a response to the above question? It doesn't look like the Standards Developing Organization Act of 2004 is applicable to the IETF. Regards, S. Moonesamy From nobody Wed Dec 8 22:15:34 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 012723A0ECE for ; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 22:15:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.899 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5o4AkiXARxAY for ; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 22:15:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from ietfx.ietf.org (ietfx.amsl.com [4.31.198.45]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF0E13A0ECD for ; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 22:15:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfx.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3F9F45567FB; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 22:15:27 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com Received: from ietfx.ietf.org ([4.31.198.45]) by localhost (ietfx.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vCbJRJghlgS8; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 22:15:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [158.140.230.105]) by ietfx.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7E25745567FA; Wed, 8 Dec 2021 22:15:27 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Jay Daley Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2021 19:15:21 +1300 Message-Id: <67181001-2571-4ED7-86D4-EB003A033FBC@ietf.org> References: Cc: "Joel M. Halpern" , gendispatch@ietf.org In-Reply-To: To: Brian E Carpenter X-Mailer: iPad Mail (19B74) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2021 06:15:33 -0000 > On 8/12/2021, at 3:40 PM, Brian E Carpenter w= rote: >=20 > =EF=BB=BFI liked the positioning of the previous version, because it was > informative, but I disliked the fact that it was intended to be > a BCP for no good reason. I certainly had several issues with the > informative text that has now disappeared, but those all seemed > to be fixable. >=20 > I dislike this version because it is less informative, and > because it is *really* pointless to tell people that they have > to obey the law, especially if you don't help them to understand > what the law might be. For most IETF participants, this will just > be a click-through item, whereas they could read the previous > draft and learn something. The discussion in the gendispatch session at IETF 112 appeared to us authors= to come to a clear-ish view - there should be two parts to this, the minima= list policy and the more effusive educational piece, with the majority appea= ring to be of the view that the latter should not be an RFC. Does that work= for you? >=20 > Is there a legal theory that this document saying "thou shalt > obey the law" protects the IETF itself? If so, that might be > a reason for proceeding. Otherwise, I'm not sure what value > it has. Yes, it=E2=80=99s the common-sense theory -=20 Prosecuting regulator: =E2=80=9CWere you clear with IETF participants that t= he services, which you pay contractors to provide and are therefore legally l= iable for, should not be used to break the law?=E2=80=9D Jay --=20 Jay Daley IETF Executive Director=20 exec-director@ietf.org >=20 > Regards > Brian Carpenter >=20 >> On 08-Dec-21 03:10, Joel M. Halpern wrote: >> After teh discussion at the IETF meeting, and after further discussion >> of the legal aspects, we have made a major revision to the document. It >> is shorter, and more direct. >> I presume some folks will dislike it even more, and some folks will find >> that it addresses their concerns. Please speak up, so that we can >> decide if this time the chairs may be able to dispatch the draft. >> Thank you, >> Joel (and Jay and Brad) >> -------- Forwarded Message -------- >> Subject: I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02.txt >> Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2021 06:01:52 -0800 >> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org >> Reply-To: internet-drafts@ietf.org >> To: i-d-announce@ietf.org >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >> directories. >> Title : Antitrust Guidelines for IETF Particiants >> Authors : Joel M. Halpern >> Brad Biddle >> Jay Daley >> Filename : draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02.txt >> Pages : 6 >> Date : 2021-12-07 >> Abstract: >> This document specifies policy for IETF participants on compliance >> with antitrust laws and how to reduce antitrust risks in connection >> with IETF activities. >> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: >> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust/ >> There is also an HTML version available at: >> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02.ht= ml >> A diff from the previous version is available at: >> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-0= 2 >> Internet-Drafts are also available by rsync at >> rsync.ietf.org::internet-drafts >> _______________________________________________ >> I-D-Announce mailing list >> I-D-Announce@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i-d-announce >> Internet-Draft directories: http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html >> or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt >=20 > --=20 > Gendispatch mailing list > Gendispatch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch >=20 From nobody Thu Dec 9 08:32:48 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D81A33A0E95 for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 08:32:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.95 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.95 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.852, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URI_DOTEDU=1.999] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yXhN9I9vTG8g for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 08:32:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qv1-xf34.google.com (mail-qv1-xf34.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F6F23A0E98 for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 08:32:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qv1-xf34.google.com with SMTP id b11so5564276qvm.7 for ; Thu, 09 Dec 2021 08:32:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :references:from:in-reply-to; bh=+47k4kr8/PB3VAay2wHSbwNvaSsT9U7iYlEggxG88S4=; b=JgViQHMy43K8qEBTS3ENZzgi7dK8DsKXwzH/GDTi6xZ219mLM1FH3rWbeVBBu1cHCx kcki7jcTsgnRzodLrksinQcB80i1wzi9+1KEVHj8z3vhAF6tjTzu9QnBX/D9NeQdGi5u gL60sk1lRSWnfdkfroaKrPv3actzyT3jhK6fihJ/ZSZyuP8VutB/vZUzP9n/g9MbakvN +WHsghxdapbE75jbF1vJtk7wzNfAAEfFwyTMp/T04p29vcCQkRRfE1k4q/xxXmHP1AjN hRvhKPJ0CnXamhP1F4lFnOXaYLhyq2aQCKBr7NBgvOK+OWjwT1sqwjlJfsuaGC6Fl4Uu 3gzA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:references:from:in-reply-to; bh=+47k4kr8/PB3VAay2wHSbwNvaSsT9U7iYlEggxG88S4=; b=whmaZX8ur3FR5AwI7BZlZDSkA3yKgXdBUOaUbuQ6WVHckC8Zcw4qROQ6wiInLB6fKS uW2gmFozNoN/upsg+HHVce/56Bq++EFsIBTAHD99rA1oMnfijIeF4ia2gvNPbrxkR8y2 0zTsnN4m0lKEpqR5C/NM0YkPwruxc7KiUfdrtJs1cV60EnmIzdnuakwEN/BpP39cRPpL AisTPu6cg5BhUcvuU3xsBqkJtDKYk4H9eQz8vSd/2LZhkT20125/vbc9RHfaSILm+g0/ 7/cyCxThl7ABVZn5N+TxpQik+eaRDa0BMcTV5VX7ZzP8369sq3KKGfjJh7MkHquTJbQG 9fqQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53388fL4d6yXiZ9rnvYC5MeV5cPUZzrNBXFQ8XrWfXh1soOWTyuc 6p8heDGmR7oFHzy0Hvb7wv0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxEvgqtBXWyanVCq+xK9WwYZD8KchlDitLo/9LUVrvYEUzvhNc1V6qqt5r5vS4TxvMTUAD9tQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:2a84:: with SMTP id jr4mr18229079qvb.35.1639067561436; Thu, 09 Dec 2021 08:32:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.249] (pool-70-106-224-166.clppva.fios.verizon.net. [70.106.224.166]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o20sm94294qkp.114.2021.12.09.08.32.40 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 09 Dec 2021 08:32:40 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------gbx8vWFiJGleXTKW3InaVg5r" Message-ID: Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2021 11:32:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.3.2 Content-Language: en-US To: S Moonesamy , Mark Nottingham , gendispatch@ietf.org References: <163595251682.11706.5053299985084837548@ietfa.amsl.com> <8854c3cc-694b-1a7f-ebc8-47bed9bb4e0f@joelhalpern.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20211208144553.0b318fd8@elandnews.com> From: Tony Rutkowski In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20211208144553.0b318fd8@elandnews.com> Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-01.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2021 16:32:48 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------gbx8vWFiJGleXTKW3InaVg5r Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit See Understanding "Balance" Requirements for Standards-Development Organizations (utah.edu) On 08-Dec-21 5:52 PM, S Moonesamy wrote: > Hi Mark, > At 03:19 PM 22-11-2021, Mark Nottingham wrote: >> Thanks, Brad. I think this is the right framing, FWIW. >> >> Related but tangental question: Does the IETF have any particular >> reason for not opting into protection under the Standards Developing >> Organization Act of 2004 in the US? Last time I looked at the Federal >> Register, we were nowhere to be seen... > > Was there a response to the above question? > > It doesn't look like the Standards Developing Organization Act of 2004 > is applicable to the IETF. > > Regards, > S. Moonesamy --------------gbx8vWFiJGleXTKW3InaVg5r Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

See Understanding "Balance" Requirements for Standards-Development Organizations (utah.edu)


On 08-Dec-21 5:52 PM, S Moonesamy wrote:
Hi Mark,
At 03:19 PM 22-11-2021, Mark Nottingham wrote:
Thanks, Brad. I think this is the right framing, FWIW.

Related but tangental question: Does the IETF have any particular reason for not opting into protection under the Standards Developing Organization Act of 2004 in the US? Last time I looked at the Federal Register, we were nowhere to be seen...

Was there a response to the above question?

It doesn't look like the Standards Developing Organization Act of 2004 is applicable to the IETF.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy
--------------gbx8vWFiJGleXTKW3InaVg5r-- From nobody Thu Dec 9 08:42:46 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BE2C3A0EC9 for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 08:42:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.85 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.85 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=iecc.com header.b=W89zO78+; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=taugh.com header.b=edgTGGjs 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 0PFnAs6S8l8T for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 08:42:39 -0800 (PST) Received: from gal.iecc.com (gal.iecc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:43:6f73:7461]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8618A3A0EC7 for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 08:42:39 -0800 (PST) Received: (qmail 29117 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2021 16:42:36 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=71bb.61b231fc.k2112; bh=63MKOSLWtQ22P9f4z/J5VIMt/uY7C4mCEHrUmsjv7ng=; b=W89zO78+Fc5aQ3xoAmroOEcfl0gEYxUpptwD3WR/a+MgSLtBrBRv+ZzUSj86cjEncWTgeq8pDm9nGFx1MOubqqKAAZ+JSA4r/pLXeqdcJ+0C9vwV3kNUX4tWe2B8NSZNp87p8yEn2/SwqeppMXIPzKFSjUNu0NmYt4aEujyqdierpq5QrkfUW1Wts4oLLH9choa+d+e1SqdVISJyYjXH230biEiU+tLVU7bE4JHwYvZ6HIBOqZk04RdJT0Dabp0aCQa5zCbPlHpSJ2MNUv5Z6Pom0UxmYsVvoHs5/qy/uuVwkPn5JSDVWQhsCSYO+MYuF1IbkBh8CTuyamNGjBokIg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:cleverness; s=71bb.61b231fc.k2112; bh=63MKOSLWtQ22P9f4z/J5VIMt/uY7C4mCEHrUmsjv7ng=; b=edgTGGjsVE+jEWtYivmRWEGLBxOHFZhwjCwiPYYiFU4SlzZoigMzptG+tvLzCkEJ3XaYkoZ8H0VP6B/+mHlnqvdJNW1HLcAh1dVX8tNEYVL5XFUqoWd9izXjAbW+nvTd7ddYEw+tWZJo7xiy8inrN/yH/keVXehKf1xPd9UiPTaN6SApL+W1RNryoWFx+ttL2UZzSlEip1NyZORdCnsu5w+ecX9Kme5fRZtQTlb3LGOxYcobfdmLsrfGLyCWQoNa2yjCHLDpeRPickRx2A+mN/ApR6L7z5sM+me2m/wMw+kxT3JRiMMydCwkBmaJi55eh/FB2Nl68t4qm9ymxzSbCA== Received: from ary.qy ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) by imap.iecc.com ([IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1126::78:696d:6170]) with ESMTPS (TLS1.2 ECDHE-RSA AES-256-GCM AEAD) via TCP6; 09 Dec 2021 16:42:36 -0000 Received: by ary.qy (Postfix, from userid 501) id D569D3130576; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 11:42:34 -0500 (EST) Date: 9 Dec 2021 11:42:34 -0500 Message-Id: <20211209164235.D569D3130576@ary.qy> From: "John Levine" To: gendispatch@ietf.org Cc: rutkowski.tony@gmail.com In-Reply-To: Organization: Taughannock Networks X-Headerized: yes Cleverness: minimal Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-01.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2021 16:42:45 -0000 It appears that Tony Rutkowski said: >-=-=-=-=-=- > >See Understanding "Balance" Requirements for Standards-Development >Organizations (utah.edu) > I presume you're aware that the guy who wrote that article is the guy who wrote our existing processes? R's, John From nobody Thu Dec 9 10:36:26 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EDEF3A085A for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 10:36:25 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URI_DOTEDU=1.999] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id G3aLraD-RCSv for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 10:36:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-oo1-xc2d.google.com (mail-oo1-xc2d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::c2d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 024C13A0858 for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 10:36:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-oo1-xc2d.google.com with SMTP id w15-20020a4a9d0f000000b002c5cfa80e84so1870150ooj.5 for ; Thu, 09 Dec 2021 10:36:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=u6V8KD2BmwokKM8UNhk1ZKsWn3tJPO91o/R8W4Kj/Ws=; b=R1d2F6/eYjTN+lahiTb8DUR4I4rDrI1On7weYwn4lacmR9tEqRdhhJEZrR7pTzdkL/ lygQ48SaA3EExmRK82OAG7yFqy72WGgzJlhtD26pI1FM0O40muKoGOLc+mQz5ODk7c6S ZYw6EhUZNvCukpYEEF58sROWBrDGH1M6OZPtme/X2S1/luE6Xm0adCgcasNBB1T77xij 4UHF399Cpz6AIw7bPafodRx6PI+Fm7dS/Bw2O3rrTIprQuAygzwA/yNsG6BX6jkmeTu6 ZNjIx2OciHKmUq16LNb/7JAENQ68YoSGw7Ix/m4QbYsuWdWSdIlxlHiDdfLxqeKWADT2 k80A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=u6V8KD2BmwokKM8UNhk1ZKsWn3tJPO91o/R8W4Kj/Ws=; b=E633kujppoXyCYDjhx/3C/PD4KnRrr7WhOp7SgRD8FJHlOBEHBwaqLU/e3RCu+qM/h NKBTLSSBCb+NvUqGhYPuDupRLSS10dxkeTnW+v52k2Duu0kZWvOSv4UtKLXZ9UIsZf15 cT3wSe85RBzMNf+SSMBWLivA/v+MGEgiTaQ1rCHyn2w5F+46lv7dZ3BS2gDAkCBwgb5U 282Nc+xqRPuHK7SpPxBw4lygqunWk5x1RnVMlhIEH+UK9ALiteDpQ74U2LccbwICnMFC 4agKMHgpEJ2ARVx0lduwPtRR4EmDAaPdBjAdgjyl0cPAnSBzvVZRSr3Pgk8OMX4z5eS0 3/dQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533vAArivLu+Armhm0hzzUDk2gq2BBbqyz5y7F+JDJpCFfPoxwJd rJTtjDkPc9Rfy4yC7KCf/LGEuvJJZszV/2FDmQhsTUcP X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzzXYlFHyioMe5hGNJ4Et+7ZaeMj7B+KW9x0Jq02hP0G7KdnkP2ky8Ttpgmx1C+YgOWfKA8SvOwGIlFdAZiuIc= X-Received: by 2002:a4a:5842:: with SMTP id f63mr5098620oob.97.1639074979829; Thu, 09 Dec 2021 10:36:19 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20211209164235.D569D3130576@ary.qy> In-Reply-To: <20211209164235.D569D3130576@ary.qy> From: Tony Rutkowski Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2021 13:36:10 -0500 Message-ID: To: John Levine Cc: gendispatch@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000eedb7705d2bae171" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-01.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2021 18:36:26 -0000 --000000000000eedb7705d2bae171 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Yes. The practitioners in the field are few. He does, however, answer the question. It is also fair to say the scrutiny of antitrust behavior in standards bodies has significantly increased, and the IETF and participants may be at increased risk using its previous do nothing approach. It remains an outlier among SDOs. On Thu, Dec 9, 2021, 11:42 AM John Levine wrote: > It appears that Tony Rutkowski said: > >-=-=-=-=-=- > > > >See Understanding "Balance" Requirements for Standards-Development > >Organizations (utah.edu) > >< > https://dc.law.utah.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1168&context=scholarship > > > > I presume you're aware that the guy who wrote that article is the guy who > wrote our existing processes? > > R's, > John > --000000000000eedb7705d2bae171 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Yes. The practitioners in the field are few.=C2=A0 He doe= s, however, answer the question.=C2=A0 It is also fair to say the scrutiny = of antitrust behavior in standards bodies has significantly increased, and = the IETF and participants may be at increased risk using its previous do no= thing approach.=C2=A0 It remains an outlier among SDOs.

On Thu, Dec 9, 2021,= 11:42 AM John Levine <johnl@taugh.co= m> wrote:
It appears that To= ny Rutkowski=C2=A0 <rutkowski.tony@gmail.com> said:
>-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-
>
>See Understanding "Balance" Requirements for Standards-Develo= pment
>Organizations (utah.edu)
><https://dc.law.utah.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3D1168&context= =3Dscholarship>

I presume you're aware that the guy who wrote that article is the guy w= ho
wrote our existing processes?

R's,
John
--000000000000eedb7705d2bae171-- From nobody Thu Dec 9 11:42:46 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AAF23A0B90; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 11:42:44 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.951 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.951 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.852, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0-CcIDd64klY; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 11:42:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pj1-x102a.google.com (mail-pj1-x102a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A60073A0B7C; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 11:42:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pj1-x102a.google.com with SMTP id iq11so5217968pjb.3; Thu, 09 Dec 2021 11:42:41 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=aCxO8VByJKsUqve+5gLySOW+/GjhBi3yORZbYHihdD8=; b=fK5yYIzSLqCQVyrue8oXvyuphkarvSZ2CFtHrizdEehHGpwRO95+8Sj7P2z4zy+YjZ Q85nmqYSKf3Mw5p2eGZcEuMdoMNYNJzjLbnzGSIiRs/RRlgGDbqYZHbGks07m4Mt/js4 herUscd2H0C2ux/YQUXYdxXQzGy482oSeYEC7j3QMKSIIVIrPP01JGZ1LwSW23G3L/Ms fQ7Vw433FQ/0gwvjUWYiBUaZJY9N7S6Hcq2EzvhcGqxzCIWAL8qt5bMg3IWfA6ijZOih WzibtEXTHkuRjGqzDtUjtHlMYM2X8B3/VbcsghRhn2wnXOLHUCvxdhpcuhCHsPgVyHqv dQ3Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=aCxO8VByJKsUqve+5gLySOW+/GjhBi3yORZbYHihdD8=; b=eU9MskHp98JtwZ2Evb0WH9ufSkZ2R4qdgy23Ktze4VgYO1xBInwqsyUycddMIVAjn4 L7yA7KEltVLlaXRwulweHknTLPb8QJsicEHgopJ1K2ELXRVZbgKe/X42guCjsFugddzz dBrrjm2crGaIalxwmZ/kRGKFoV5t6RyiZCnqkn1EmLztLLu+CdLVjNlewEgVNJml1K3k uedeHEkVAI0niWPyjGjfjpBUpCsLseLQ2mLPCEU97DHYhauNSyMIg09Ljn84nOoBz/zo /z6vrq/pi3tVgoX1ZvBE0yKFB1T46aKbCvWVTtQ/rT9I75PbzPdHLBhLdxl1sNAVHDyo NP7w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5330MJjleKNnKxXo5z6xH4saoW1Fr1PHlLEXyfTjY9UNFh1TDY2/ LbHXnyBvGFzteSwSJbNS57f8OHOHuGjHMA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxwZY1LQeoBj8R462C33FPsd/K/+k0Mz8KJaYR0eP4vd2Srko3kiqgwX2wej+X0iJkLdjnWSg== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:6905:b0:142:9e19:702e with SMTP id j5-20020a170902690500b001429e19702emr71534777plk.34.1639078960271; Thu, 09 Dec 2021 11:42:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e003:1198:3101:80b2:5c79:2266:e431? ([2406:e003:1198:3101:80b2:5c79:2266:e431]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m24sm395073pgk.39.2021.12.09.11.42.38 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 09 Dec 2021 11:42:39 -0800 (PST) To: Jay Daley Cc: "Joel M. Halpern" , gendispatch@ietf.org References: <67181001-2571-4ED7-86D4-EB003A033FBC@ietf.org> From: Brian E Carpenter Message-ID: Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 08:42:34 +1300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <67181001-2571-4ED7-86D4-EB003A033FBC@ietf.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2021 19:42:44 -0000 Hi Jay, On 09-Dec-21 19:15, Jay Daley wrote: >=20 >=20 >> On 8/12/2021, at 3:40 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote: >> >> =EF=BB=BFI liked the positioning of the previous version, because it w= as >> informative, but I disliked the fact that it was intended to be >> a BCP for no good reason. I certainly had several issues with the >> informative text that has now disappeared, but those all seemed >> to be fixable. >> >> I dislike this version because it is less informative, and >> because it is *really* pointless to tell people that they have >> to obey the law, especially if you don't help them to understand >> what the law might be. For most IETF participants, this will just >> be a click-through item, whereas they could read the previous >> draft and learn something. >=20 > The discussion in the gendispatch session at IETF 112=20 I didn't have the fortitude to get up in the middle of the night for that= =2E > appeared to us authors to come to a clear-ish view - there should be tw= o parts to this, the minimalist policy and the more effusive educational = piece,=20 I'm not sure that's necessary, but I have no particular objection. > with the majority appearing to be of the view that the latter should no= t be an RFC. Does that work for you? I'm a bit concerned about how we'll establish rough consensus (not about = the law, but about how to describe the law). But since it will be guideli= nes, not rules, I guess it's OK. >> >> Is there a legal theory that this document saying "thou shalt >> obey the law" protects the IETF itself? If so, that might be >> a reason for proceeding. Otherwise, I'm not sure what value >> it has. >=20 > Yes, it=E2=80=99s the common-sense theory - >=20 > Prosecuting regulator: =E2=80=9CWere you clear with IETF participants t= hat the services, which you pay contractors to provide and are therefore = legally liable for, should not be used to break the law?=E2=80=9D If that's the argument, then I think the document should observe that thi= s changes nothing in past history and does not imply any change to the ru= les, but is only published now to clarify that the creation of IETF LLC c= hanged nothing. (I'm confident that the authors can express that more ele= gantly.) Regards Brian From nobody Thu Dec 9 14:32:04 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC8CE3A1186; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 14:32:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WO0otiFxxy1S; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 14:32:01 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-il1-x12d.google.com (mail-il1-x12d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A91B3A111D; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 14:32:01 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-il1-x12d.google.com with SMTP id m5so6764603ilh.11; Thu, 09 Dec 2021 14:32:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=RRXkwYyIT/TlSiM3OeEcGH1UAllDyqIuWQ8lNtQDv8M=; b=kaohsVpmxbx+8RzlRpHdntwPWIp60C6lpASOdt7CPcdIa5X1NPimsShD7rBHTheEMc ebO6+QA7LAhEZ6C1+pSze0JRxAJD6Yd9OJZlpIEB2pBs3uRgsEvOBPbSk+kQlafqqyoS /RUCGU4xPfQHcTxqoYMthyfFu6BKRXSczkH3fG2mAZ5+CywPQA5Sq5ANIHRKYpkDCHri c8ZlElZSj6pAXtppeMxDEpbyrgy6Qz0yySZIOKu6qVYwQT1Uai97Uvr9fvTUJarViU8c crahS+X2BMGNjAdCjDdMtByj9HJ8ft5Vdg4FaJKOEEjbtB0/Ij1CKpsYhZCEWHM9c3ME PNVg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=RRXkwYyIT/TlSiM3OeEcGH1UAllDyqIuWQ8lNtQDv8M=; b=BYkTOO+YpFcX4zQB/yNp3oTfAP4SR+orvvRe1hX8bksoL0nOoYgWCDser06ojmqo2P hUoDOzs49gE4eWppI6O1UNnYJVqAULHdb8QofwoCDz/q2NiLV3Ah6hP/onp9Bl4VOA/L 5qjCAjGksYGJx95koFruup/6WOoBKGJAiv4lN+qHLaSFk9BqkwG75bEaDeS1Sq49CKjt r+L4TMAFqpPly3xj/IAABD5T6GBy01sGCfp9EmDVEtDGx9KBnlx9w5fFBu3IpjWrH274 Ab753DwVAOsCIjk3+WgNxNt9Oy2OFdd7NsH+wS66W9c3VHeQ9hlTqu8ENC0lIOU1zp62 F/gA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533ZYB1Q+GPqoRyll+Hf92DaQXIJDfGXc8aD2JHVq6dcB5odd+VL mzMfaAIeOgd+1afRth9BwL0fftr1hJEQKSrb3hL9QnFSXSA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzKh4Yxf690B5/uDs9XmY4Ynu0uvNv0GisBq556GaKGozwDSebyXzvnYRZZbNJVLxkpNZzsQW4K1nOynudMnFI= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:601:: with SMTP id t1mr19093560ils.144.1639089118647; Thu, 09 Dec 2021 14:31:58 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <67181001-2571-4ED7-86D4-EB003A033FBC@ietf.org> In-Reply-To: From: Rob Sayre Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2021 14:31:47 -0800 Message-ID: To: Brian E Carpenter Cc: Jay Daley , GENDISPATCH List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ac1afa05d2be2c8f" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2021 22:32:03 -0000 --000000000000ac1afa05d2be2c8f Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 11:42 AM Brian E Carpenter < brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > The discussion in the gendispatch session at IETF 112 > > > I didn't have the fortitude to get up in the middle of the night for that. > Brian, and anyone else interested, fyi you can see all of the sessions on YouTube very soon after they conclude. I actually watch most IETF meetings this way, since I can skip parts, use 1.5x speed, and do so at an hour that suits me. Brad Biddle's turns at the mic in the gendispatch discussion are worth watching: https://youtu.be/nEoDE1mSlic?t=4613 thanks, Rob --000000000000ac1afa05d2be2c8f Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 11:42 AM Brian E C= arpenter <brian.e.carpent= er@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The discussion in the gendispatch session at IETF 112


I didn't have the fortitude to get up in the middle of the night for th= at.

Brian, and anyone else interested, = fyi you can see all of the sessions on YouTube very soon after they conclud= e. I actually watch most IETF meetings this way, since I can skip parts, us= e 1.5x speed,=C2=A0and do so at an hour that suits me.

=
Brad Biddle's turns at the mic in the gendispatch discussion are w= orth watching:=C2=A0https= ://youtu.be/nEoDE1mSlic?t=3D4613

thanks,
=
Rob

--000000000000ac1afa05d2be2c8f-- From nobody Thu Dec 9 16:21:39 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E4AA3A1594 for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 16:21:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.101 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnot.net header.b=GoxnpQTH; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=Dzuw9u04 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 tKxyMbOsJIm6 for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 16:21:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout3-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3CBA53A1593 for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 16:21:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2051F3202178; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 19:21:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 09 Dec 2021 19:21:27 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; s=fm1; bh=3 eLoRrhde/BjSzQRyAwSSz0BP5Km2MRKn97JamAgwns=; b=GoxnpQTHU6ZWXiGmt sSjlSUlnCglLdIem8xKw0cag21vbDY8DIhhT66brlt+VQYZnX8rBEG4vOZtsvAFN Ktusnpta5NcS4qwBKQiGk3cU4BsU7Y1lxaUbw9CzCV2KD55EVeGnS7TE42+KxlZ7 oInrxdUT650dQNasesM+tOrHvauTCPl1QZHzgLNL3LZP8JXoJlAmt2WUtjyyYZkT +8+Ynk9/6gybFs4kRl8FONjiQDcohRqKrEAV/mDuAfnGk/VRFp0l/SjtvOaOIaD9 CubSvxTYyJ5vVX+l6ahmm7YZHeIKvQYjXo667jGM56vThyu0NFkhmWJjtvxKcc6c rto9A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=3eLoRrhde/BjSzQRyAwSSz0BP5Km2MRKn97JamAgw ns=; b=Dzuw9u04SBU5NW3X/vTBgxgiQlFWShwBel9BoN7io08dhYocU0kzXZZaQ ZNYT7/j2rX2MF9bQ/o5JzM8l+nPfFGnapAcayd8QypNU2xiqueHY1h/gyawqnOHy KpASbNEabHXSeTRvXWR+Pudy/AZ6tJrIxgQnQ140i+9Y66n+TEWuKDdQNtCuycbl q7gRvQH7t81aEQbZ6T74TJ0ZNW95OBavf4NpTAe3kZJtFRh0aWRymG56OsaOfJu4 u3Kkq6ho7NgsK7QfWAk38UdGwNhJZiOguoFmNh1IgfeK5cj8WP0oAHSOdyyM/TZn /q1Q496tF+QJKYohVVhtT0WZtQj4g== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvuddrkedugddvtdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpegtggfuhfgjfffgkfhfvffosehtqhhmtdhhtddvnecuhfhrohhmpeforghrkhcu pfhothhtihhnghhhrghmuceomhhnohhtsehmnhhothdrnhgvtheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvg hrnhepvefffffhudetveevhfeuffeigedtuedtheffleetffeftddtgeegjeehieeuteet necuffhomhgrihhnpehmnhhothdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurf grrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmnhhothesmhhnohhtrdhnvght X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 19:21:24 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.20.0.1.32\)) From: Mark Nottingham In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 11:21:22 +1100 Cc: S Moonesamy , GENDISPATCH List Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <48DAA372-F678-49F3-B611-F9F1176FD404@mnot.net> References: <163595251682.11706.5053299985084837548@ietfa.amsl.com> <8854c3cc-694b-1a7f-ebc8-47bed9bb4e0f@joelhalpern.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20211208144553.0b318fd8@elandnews.com> To: Tony Rutkowski X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3693.20.0.1.32) Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-01.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 00:21:38 -0000 Ah, thanks -- I hadn't seen that before, and it's very helpful. It does indeed answer the question, although I can't help but wonder if = the decisions made were really *IETF* decisions, in the sense we use = today. Cheers, > On 10 Dec 2021, at 3:32 am, Tony Rutkowski = wrote: >=20 > See Understanding "Balance" Requirements for Standards-Development = Organizations (utah.edu) >=20 >=20 >=20 > On 08-Dec-21 5:52 PM, S Moonesamy wrote: >> Hi Mark,=20 >> At 03:19 PM 22-11-2021, Mark Nottingham wrote:=20 >>> Thanks, Brad. I think this is the right framing, FWIW.=20 >>>=20 >>> Related but tangental question: Does the IETF have any particular = reason for not opting into protection under the Standards Developing = Organization Act of 2004 in the US? Last time I looked at the Federal = Register, we were nowhere to be seen...=20 >>=20 >> Was there a response to the above question?=20 >>=20 >> It doesn't look like the Standards Developing Organization Act of = 2004 is applicable to the IETF.=20 >>=20 >> Regards,=20 >> S. Moonesamy=20 -- Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ From nobody Thu Dec 9 16:56:11 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 235BF3A162F for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 16:56:09 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.097 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zrhswHMjx6zA for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 16:56:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-il1-x12f.google.com (mail-il1-x12f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 636F93A162D for ; Thu, 9 Dec 2021 16:56:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-il1-x12f.google.com with SMTP id a11so7072949ilj.6 for ; Thu, 09 Dec 2021 16:56:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=GjY4gtpAMwJE6QTVmT8ZMWSPlzfq1gKrRHJNkDjTVSA=; b=Ga4OS4EXGfrJlcRjvD9ljJGUMxBCRMFDItaGgi5hxV9LBkrcvGmUmEDVBE/jEILVq+ Lm4wPlkRSDTfmWqnGNuUYMc6Ij5mz/xVJCpdv0h1wqCJUsC9AT13HQKBlzu73xg1MOcC Cxo1Wb9KjB922qmCipzjvRzfrhm7zcHR0b3Rd4M7cUEvXjnxDWF7E9w47C5XIEvxCL82 QnaJfUm2bf/MWjgchHrtIIEc303S4N/FABLhlMrAYeajBMy8uPxS6RS6tphlLaHHpamG MGf9VtB/cFMi2lRxOxt9jolXVAyY2rY1RCO8AsV0zg2j5YX8mTxId1fGPERG/e5GH0fI Bujw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=GjY4gtpAMwJE6QTVmT8ZMWSPlzfq1gKrRHJNkDjTVSA=; b=p2K5wcEKC4LWVL1Bpm5dsOjWxmsH8NPPXaJS3CEivuO+9iETClWwWH0bSuQV4OhGm+ caIL4fHJogvesechGPDtWovYtmES/10PxDM8jQlK8K5uaVOFzkWm60Z055tyV1InggLb HLLoWlwXQShm1kYwE1tpfe7GoctlaSKKr1vBicfTWqAY2sg7w3oX7wy2mmEjU4TsW4h+ +Y+fLNxOhKfcg+x7XCzsFVVPh2aplCyU4/KTViOu15oZKk33CAr/DImN6GOxXAzBi1ns hwNeUyW6psXa1GEIipKNSb/8nN8Jilm4jtQ0uhmzzvkgDDBHk5lQE/HOww0QGfiLCQKF npyw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532S20cN4iloMxY0iXd142erEnnYQ0ydP3a2v2iQ/NIHHzZK2Y1h pZ4ZD+KDjvUKngjKkQLnVITLI0trUd1AkcCBc1A= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzbHpluFoY+ElvOzSwwfCGgYcNOdqkM1ivpGot7sq2iKTIrWPbvH6ykBp7aCQfVQqNX5YDdpwsUKur54tRMqJU= X-Received: by 2002:a92:cc50:: with SMTP id t16mr16437785ilq.88.1639097763041; Thu, 09 Dec 2021 16:56:03 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <163595251682.11706.5053299985084837548@ietfa.amsl.com> <8854c3cc-694b-1a7f-ebc8-47bed9bb4e0f@joelhalpern.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20211208144553.0b318fd8@elandnews.com> <48DAA372-F678-49F3-B611-F9F1176FD404@mnot.net> In-Reply-To: <48DAA372-F678-49F3-B611-F9F1176FD404@mnot.net> From: Rob Sayre Date: Thu, 9 Dec 2021 16:55:52 -0800 Message-ID: To: Mark Nottingham Cc: Tony Rutkowski , GENDISPATCH List , S Moonesamy Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000eb151105d2c02f4f" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-01.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 00:56:09 -0000 --000000000000eb151105d2c02f4f Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" A better link: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3454894 Coincidentally, written by the same person that authored the existing circa 2013 IETF policies and educational materials we have now. thanks, Rob On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 4:21 PM Mark Nottingham wrote: > Ah, thanks -- I hadn't seen that before, and it's very helpful. > > It does indeed answer the question, although I can't help but wonder if > the decisions made were really *IETF* decisions, in the sense we use today. > > Cheers, > > > > On 10 Dec 2021, at 3:32 am, Tony Rutkowski > wrote: > > > > See Understanding "Balance" Requirements for Standards-Development > Organizations (utah.edu) > > > > > > > > On 08-Dec-21 5:52 PM, S Moonesamy wrote: > >> Hi Mark, > >> At 03:19 PM 22-11-2021, Mark Nottingham wrote: > >>> Thanks, Brad. I think this is the right framing, FWIW. > >>> > >>> Related but tangental question: Does the IETF have any particular > reason for not opting into protection under the Standards Developing > Organization Act of 2004 in the US? Last time I looked at the Federal > Register, we were nowhere to be seen... > >> > >> Was there a response to the above question? > >> > >> It doesn't look like the Standards Developing Organization Act of 2004 > is applicable to the IETF. > >> > >> Regards, > >> S. Moonesamy > > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ > > -- > Gendispatch mailing list > Gendispatch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch > --000000000000eb151105d2c02f4f Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
A better link:


Coinc= identally, written by the same person that authored the existing circa 2013= IETF policies and educational materials we have now.

<= div>thanks,
Rob


On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 4:21 P= M Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>= ; wrote:
Ah, tha= nks -- I hadn't seen that before, and it's very helpful.

It does indeed answer the question, although I can't help but wonder if= the decisions made were really *IETF* decisions, in the sense we use today= .

Cheers,


> On 10 Dec 2021, at 3:32 am, Tony Rutkowski <rutkowski.tony@gmail.com> wro= te:
>
> See Understanding "Balance" Requirements for Standards-Devel= opment Organizations (utah.edu)
>
>
>
> On 08-Dec-21 5:52 PM, S Moonesamy wrote:
>> Hi Mark,
>> At 03:19 PM 22-11-2021, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>>> Thanks, Brad. I think this is the right framing, FWIW.
>>>
>>> Related but tangental question: Does the IETF have any particu= lar reason for not opting into protection under the Standards Developing Or= ganization Act of 2004 in the US? Last time I looked at the Federal Registe= r, we were nowhere to be seen...
>>
>> Was there a response to the above question?
>>
>> It doesn't look like the Standards Developing Organization Act= of 2004 is applicable to the IETF.
>>
>> Regards,
>> S. Moonesamy

--
Mark Nottingham=C2=A0 =C2=A0https://www.mnot.net/

--
Gendispatch mailing list
Gendispatch@ietf.= org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch
--000000000000eb151105d2c02f4f-- From nobody Fri Dec 10 14:26:20 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 276163A08E3; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:26:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.098 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QZY54SdObPtS; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:26:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-il1-x12c.google.com (mail-il1-x12c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79A0B3A08D6; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:26:16 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-il1-x12c.google.com with SMTP id d14so7365707ila.1; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:26:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=k0/1jfqcLXPHenH1SoQmVsE3Fkv2PiRbsbr3PLckJOA=; b=WtgcDOPp2mWq0g6iZf/5jEVyo5NjoM7LYkm58JMzJq645JYoUBfcDDMhx8vIn9tL/C wZOPFrU7V2RuhQ4SWaBcgAS0WsCvIi3Z+ZrewAhIj66dBGGU9pU10SoJExF6sfdD7ViR IAW8u9lyE5ma8QkeAJERnrs7BU4zQBpHjVW8YMF2qMJm8HNIrZ4Ogp3Z02u9T4hKj4wo cidKcM+OP8o5kiSONt0KjJy5hdwRikaGdg8BIPeXLT9S16KQ8p0q6qcepjlA/UT+9t6q fuGQzqVdBbBpFucF2bOJlodV45x8OwAegXXoUWrOw5c4PohxBBbg4vLpSs8gApcNBYuf LbIQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=k0/1jfqcLXPHenH1SoQmVsE3Fkv2PiRbsbr3PLckJOA=; b=pfYwVPWqxWUQLWNZc2U+E4AzS3U8OgRmC7VSTG815yTy2FJne9FLNdmi2cKrSeEDnu TwL7zBVdtSaPnf0+5crLaeAdmgbRyecHbnany6zsdhNDmv1TC953E/lyxSJh5da3FRZn WEKHQhPJZBy3arE6Tc/W1KbEvTLDr6WQVyMKDpVrUegTO2XILV/A0z5twwhu3toghpW6 KOxvfn/tJCjo/ry85JSLcL7LANtDIYfak2OzS0DtF2uMbU/hDm4DJVCtUJamZXjMnf4v lRDwNb09+kbmySxrQtAmyi2aNDOuzIAkXkFNmpFR/gVBvYtcAdy/R2qtD4U3Z4uQ3aZ/ ofyQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530T9gRWF4J9hDuowqFrcs3PYZkgqdpQ0d7Ehp21bQ+t/4cUsY51 f4wkppBGtFhdNTxqtSJnv2UUAZX+EQ74chYpA6Takt6X4f+7dw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyM97Gasciw8bAygk3KkquqAh0Bp4AUkytXWSSb+hXea9ATtAqGjbe/wySv2ShICnqkcW5XzLLwBSeURi9DfV0= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:1646:: with SMTP id v6mr20681469ilu.155.1639175174754; Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:26:14 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <67181001-2571-4ED7-86D4-EB003A033FBC@ietf.org> In-Reply-To: From: Rob Sayre Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 14:26:03 -0800 Message-ID: To: Brian E Carpenter Cc: Jay Daley , GENDISPATCH List Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000004158c05d2d236ca" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-02.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2021 22:26:18 -0000 --00000000000004158c05d2d236ca Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Also, please don't miss this part at the end: https://youtu.be/nEoDE1mSlic?t=6985 I had forgotten that this bit was disconnected from the rest of the discussion. thanks, Rob On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 2:31 PM Rob Sayre wrote: > On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 11:42 AM Brian E Carpenter < > brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > The discussion in the gendispatch session at IETF 112 >> >> >> I didn't have the fortitude to get up in the middle of the night for that. >> > > Brian, and anyone else interested, fyi you can see all of the sessions on > YouTube very soon after they conclude. I actually watch most IETF meetings > this way, since I can skip parts, use 1.5x speed, and do so at an hour that > suits me. > > Brad Biddle's turns at the mic in the gendispatch discussion are worth > watching: https://youtu.be/nEoDE1mSlic?t=4613 > > thanks, > Rob > > --00000000000004158c05d2d236ca Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Also, please don't miss this part at the end:

=

I had forgotten th= at this bit was disconnected from the rest of the discussion.
thanks,
Rob


On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 = at 2:31 PM Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.c= om> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 9, 2021 at 11:42 AM Brian E= Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The discussion in the gendispatch session at IETF 112


I didn't have the fortitude to get up in the middle of the night for th= at.

Brian, and anyone else interested, = fyi you can see all of the sessions on YouTube very soon after they conclud= e. I actually watch most IETF meetings this way, since I can skip parts, us= e 1.5x speed,=C2=A0and do so at an hour that suits me.

=
Brad Biddle's turns at the mic in the gendispatch discussion are w= orth watching:=C2=A0https://youtu.be/nEoDE1mSlic?t=3D4613

=
thanks,
Rob

--00000000000004158c05d2d236ca-- From nobody Mon Dec 13 07:26:42 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43E683A0602; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 07:26:40 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mh6vOHhHKySy; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 07:26:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:211:32ff:fe22:186f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 849743A011F; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 07:26:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:ec58:56ae:8f8f:5728]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 32FA0600E3F; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 17:26:23 +0200 (EET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1639409183; bh=GPjafMyzIv4h7srxzYjQXqC9nfFO3foTfWwooFrpOWY=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=Z7Zw+5Ty7n14CW+FgtjEWSXtw2ylWuwD3bnG25gZcqQWmOuEvdtE5a3Ch1L7iWFvw 7cmDyssG2fe6UVI6EjHtcEm9v8yY9wuOTL8R6ey1HSkJitHIyiDZs6BMfKlsqo7DWC 2NToKtX9CFxxpFEUG8Z7ALSeAUeKKa+5Nm2Nr+Ls= Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_AB7BFFEC-8118-4067-A957-205993891D27"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.20.0.1.32\)) From: Lars Eggert In-Reply-To: <01D32738-3C5B-4EB7-B0CF-33343C187969@episteme.net> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2021 17:26:22 +0200 Cc: Benjamin Kaduk , gendispatch@ietf.org, The IESG , gendispatch-chairs@ietf.org Message-Id: <21FE53D5-D4E8-4978-BBCC-92719589EED7@eggert.org> References: <163842543502.20877.4835523817199553759@ietfa.amsl.com> <01D32738-3C5B-4EB7-B0CF-33343C187969@episteme.net> To: Pete Resnick X-MailScanner-ID: 32FA0600E3F.A35FC X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on charter-ietf-gendispatch-01-00: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2021 15:26:40 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_AB7BFFEC-8118-4067-A957-205993891D27 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi, based on what Pete wrote, my suggestion is to replace: > Work related to the IAB, IRTF, and RFC Editor processes is out of scope. with Work related to the IAB, IRTF, and RFC Editor processes are out of scope, but when discussions in GENDISPATCH identify such work items, they can be suggested to those bodies for action. Thoughts? Thanks, Lars --Apple-Mail=_AB7BFFEC-8118-4067-A957-205993891D27 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEmpq0ZpSoejRmyhheVLXDCb9wwVcFAmG3Zh4ACgkQVLXDCb9w wVetvxAApySixyY0bKyerzQE2m/x/rfzCghasa/PKE7zTM9NK+J8NpDw0hMEk3Mh VO4IpgGxX0oawmzCcMrV0Mz7ixLqgiD7TIbL04hLCiWv5SsMtXz7VuP76HHMjseZ mEQ1DkSNuM6A+vzdhl0ve/N6VlUnDpvyrZ7bGhQT4N7m6vy85k5BSbYlNeVn96NW BmUmuuQ0XRUa8jmjQpr86nbN6rVR/m2xS51lhJhQTvRuQa/zZ7TYbuNLbk1ZqQZg CNyzN9li3U3wZMpe3aPxAMqYAyab38oyEJxu+SSJ/DtOjw3KAVPOLXOCoD3SP1H7 bzbuAh95vBKF4L4qW4YrLtxHNYG+k4Vqpr6kjjWu4UFxVL4UIRJvjMqb73gDRHYZ AwkKGwGv7Z98+rLajp/rYDxep8oP404/dm26d4ImFealvp0mXo6bjnoHppcPqavG jEli/MSL99gNSsvDc2VzqJjbugQWlakiZEsIo3iAaoZkjCqkMUYzzhlc7BvvxOhj d9IrVGIMbPUcea857rwA2C/oQRYsk0Nt7veS4hc/XUPclffiuGVL2p0OL8b7vKb6 y7QtEdslZt44NJIm6/DhWreJMHOOf7S5yLm0XstjQCbCEmJyyj6aTLlG8bnoH0jT d1orogq6h1wHLzq/WE1zbRIvVjuFMU5SE2Ons7PDm9ZN3gEay8k= =frmH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_AB7BFFEC-8118-4067-A957-205993891D27-- From nobody Mon Dec 13 07:28:43 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 670543A044D; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 07:28:37 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id iFtJfI3oGHJ7; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 07:28:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:211:32ff:fe22:186f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AD9103A011F; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 07:28:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:ec58:56ae:8f8f:5728]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E0E65600E4C; Mon, 13 Dec 2021 17:28:24 +0200 (EET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1639409304; bh=xMaOljLxxYKdsBb68pMgp8Pr3GgxAdjKVwvFW0tsPJA=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=h4V37us67vaXvY/v+IC/eU/BpJaXcQ5N2kTE977kL5vPt3Be+iz9WD6K85xWwD8d0 itQk0hC5gV2Q9rHJm6uBhmpFyCzP2evRioeQUAQhoVtPQl9mM6+C7yPmFSsfAjn35M 3IU3slSeJ9BMW1yB4DpEeo/moNsrpgmXJf39mlgI= Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_08E9B33C-9569-40CB-ADC0-CDC959BF46CE"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.20.0.1.32\)) From: Lars Eggert In-Reply-To: <163835660760.16598.13673275377460089178@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2021 17:28:24 +0200 Cc: The IESG , gendispatch@ietf.org, gendispatch-chairs@ietf.org Message-Id: <4DFE8687-85FE-4C55-BCB9-67108FFCC26C@eggert.org> References: <163835660760.16598.13673275377460089178@ietfa.amsl.com> To: Robert Wilton X-MailScanner-ID: E0E65600E4C.A2495 X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Robert Wilton's No Objection on charter-ietf-gendispatch-01-00: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2021 15:28:38 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_08E9B33C-9569-40CB-ADC0-CDC959BF46CE Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi, On 2021-12-1, at 13:03, Robert Wilton via Datatracker = wrote: > I question whether AD sponsored documents should be discussed on the = IETF > discussion mailing list, or whether it would be better for those = discussions to > continue on the Gendispatch mailing (or an alternative open small = mailing > list)? It is certainly possible that some individuals who may be = interested in > participating in these drafts are subscribed to Gendispatch but choose = not to > be subscribed to the IETF discussion mailing list. my text suggestion for Francesca's comment would remove that text = entirely, FWIW. Thanks, Lars --Apple-Mail=_08E9B33C-9569-40CB-ADC0-CDC959BF46CE Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEmpq0ZpSoejRmyhheVLXDCb9wwVcFAmG3ZpgACgkQVLXDCb9w wVdd1w//ZwNvAQciweMSJnnNr5vtxCoeI4I5Q+xzSdTiUjtINOmn4NFVYMB62ihi oypwPxpTL/27VbdDKYIdsygfoytOWahtBhLPuRXbwjYFL9kB2ut7gMhmx0Sqxxqw MN9kTfgUnGUeJJewQdgjh3g72uez0qhnhapbk+bP80ukgrIWPSwz6CRFapBiLLT2 7JhxGGN5FuN6pU6FUq4epdP4qH4hXKRW3M8syDaLmci+F4T2afHJ08+S+VvaqlQS rOGT/5QesB8D0v6zfPe5Terp2rJLCW2roCCQ1mcw8g7cCplBExBLnq8TDxsE7LGi K4sNwQ13xceU+tDdk/MOs2nqChcCQVNxkGM+YuSvsoZnqREF3+W2JwEemmEfn8rL Nwv1uskILvbOdU5Xn4MAHM+wWxI7G1SQTvNZUGMNM7ZwIrcdrtQRDCKhsnm67WIa iFYgq5OCf1FbDFju5xvuGXZ4PihD3wNPYjnD+7P2O+iEooW0MALpKXxsVRq1n/rO JtzyZD7Ow2JS+IsuxVMylB37IVxiTN7CKvIr2bMzjj1ipGGL3acwq97j6X/HjiMs 7BQVGeZd5tEBCIv4w+4ccZg/+IMAD0Ab8HZAt3VIzFqorc9hVGvRFR7tN+55nhtp em01BjtAoi7Lz3nPKBG+4/ySa0IM1gUxwxgDCa2JVIM2E7vDWJc= =vNPk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_08E9B33C-9569-40CB-ADC0-CDC959BF46CE-- From nobody Wed Dec 15 08:43:28 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A6003A0B92; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 08:43:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.951 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.951 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.852, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ExQLXiMvOYo1; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 08:43:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qv1-xf2d.google.com (mail-qv1-xf2d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f2d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0662A3A0B72; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 08:43:04 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qv1-xf2d.google.com with SMTP id u16so20807126qvk.4; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 08:43:04 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :cc:references:from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Cal/NyBc+g/tveJ32uErVTm4MgMKuz8aAWiWIOS2ojY=; b=LnTmZHJtE/ZZwSCxFVG5Qo/sHkKjpB5+y/cV2jYMCpQwU8w3NxpzARfeirxTKkAIu1 yeWkkXlTOGizupHEvm/xv1iXtNUTlWkd5cN/gecWN3f2ilPALuE0hn3lP+Kwyql/tEFz 7X6JRsINS28Z7cag+nmgXThwNlF+cfV0R4aiOfj4YdQw3JjNcl6/ZgqQrKHJDCH2mhJW 6svnUk3hIA7JMzD+DrIsVomi4/IAWRf9F8NpKBAw0mxUWPfiyTxVZMQelL1nAJpr68Js 93GPLfByqR+wYdp/JyoPvIDFWgEBeXZ8E6ew4Ejt1ZmpjqsXgJeGb8t31F4sWgztlJu1 yUCA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Cal/NyBc+g/tveJ32uErVTm4MgMKuz8aAWiWIOS2ojY=; b=2387sJvK9qbQU/UEHOOh0NeW2/KBDajT3oONd/1w+9kE7mQoI80LJOSE6n0osXxfIV qWap3LpIBGF/KTU2DdFRiIuX2mXLaN4i4YgfxkPUWZBucHgP9sv21u7o6o8VQ+BMP/R9 KWcSUn6VTpA2pFcocOcZICFJGfpaYUfLFY7NPCs79pYQTrcEf2l1KfB2caygTzZQTIcX 88ksecUHyMKCphMlVelNz/Yqqz9zwul69Kfz4LI7RDDeqME8jtfoecYYJAaK1ExYLfqX GNzRnWhIgjTAtid33qtRG6wTh5/jbwY8oh8/KQAmLUcfMkIsYafiVLCcIQ5xjIU/oe1K 5vdg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532wyH9Dg0dRn7qj14WixCi8sEb32KsQ5rvtuhXtLnQ+BZBBCP/Y rvEUuxIqYr+HEu3fdbt+YHNk7neU74U= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy6FVsPxxa1wcwk0H63QuYBh9NF98C+3hUL+EIxSc2Dam2KjEyFxAKkY8r/ub1/e6ZUGVNveQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:5096:: with SMTP id kk22mr3636875qvb.117.1639586582740; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 08:43:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.249] (pool-70-106-224-166.clppva.fios.verizon.net. [70.106.224.166]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u7sm1400301qkp.17.2021.12.15.08.43.01 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 15 Dec 2021 08:43:01 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 11:43:01 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.4.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Lars Eggert , Pete Resnick Cc: gendispatch@ietf.org, Benjamin Kaduk , gendispatch-chairs@ietf.org, The IESG References: <163842543502.20877.4835523817199553759@ietfa.amsl.com> <01D32738-3C5B-4EB7-B0CF-33343C187969@episteme.net> <21FE53D5-D4E8-4978-BBCC-92719589EED7@eggert.org> From: Tony Rutkowski In-Reply-To: <21FE53D5-D4E8-4978-BBCC-92719589EED7@eggert.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on charter-ietf-gendispatch-01-00: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 16:43:27 -0000 Antitrust law applies to all anticompetitive behavior irrespective of the body.  It is unclear why the guidelines would not be equally applicable to all these bodies. --amr On 13-Dec-21 10:26 AM, Lars Eggert wrote: > Hi, > > based on what Pete wrote, my suggestion is to replace: > >> Work related to the IAB, IRTF, and RFC Editor processes is out of scope. > with > > Work related to the IAB, IRTF, and RFC Editor processes are out of scope, > but when discussions in GENDISPATCH identify such work items, they can > be suggested to those bodies for action. > > Thoughts? > > Thanks, > Lars > > From nobody Wed Dec 15 09:07:01 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 086743A00F7; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 09:06:59 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 05Ug5ZR_H5S1; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 09:06:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [91.190.195.94]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBBB53A0105; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 09:06:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:d882:dbf6:7ad7:3ad7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 26D2A606EDC; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 19:06:43 +0200 (EET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1639588003; bh=z8uknvwNssEE242mdj1thxbjeL5BBLBumRbweV8GVfE=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=DtP2xUecTihsA5OmELwd6Lvld8s8MV6c88+qH7wH8BGGZbim5ALCQ1p74j45p46I4 IhSDcuXwEWvAeCavAEclUrB2lYWC9oRDT8C8zZ8d6Gg7OmLU/QC0eTMsIN+NJD7lDP yF6sRIBTZ6y7+Q4ox4YMP6IrN48v+CoYPIUhfoZ0= Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5D8F580A-D5D0-4AF2-B8C1-9586B00F8AD3"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.40.0.1.81\)) From: Lars Eggert In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 19:06:42 +0200 Cc: Pete Resnick , GENDISPATCH List , Benjamin Kaduk , gendispatch-chairs@ietf.org, The IESG Message-Id: <51F0B6D0-E351-4668-A13C-5502D79DB5DE@eggert.org> References: <163842543502.20877.4835523817199553759@ietfa.amsl.com> <01D32738-3C5B-4EB7-B0CF-33343C187969@episteme.net> <21FE53D5-D4E8-4978-BBCC-92719589EED7@eggert.org> To: Tony Rutkowski X-MailScanner-ID: 26D2A606EDC.A84DE X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on charter-ietf-gendispatch-01-00: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 17:07:00 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_5D8F580A-D5D0-4AF2-B8C1-9586B00F8AD3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Hi Tony, On 2021-12-15, at 18:43, Tony Rutkowski = wrote: >=20 > Antitrust law applies to all anticompetitive behavior irrespective of = the body. It is unclear why the guidelines would not be equally = applicable to all these bodies. this thread is about the gendispatch rechartering, not = draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust. Thanks, Lars >=20 > --amr >=20 > On 13-Dec-21 10:26 AM, Lars Eggert wrote: >> Hi, >>=20 >> based on what Pete wrote, my suggestion is to replace: >>=20 >>> Work related to the IAB, IRTF, and RFC Editor processes is out of = scope. >> with >>=20 >> Work related to the IAB, IRTF, and RFC Editor processes are out of = scope, >> but when discussions in GENDISPATCH identify such work items, they = can >> be suggested to those bodies for action. >>=20 >> Thoughts? >>=20 >> Thanks, >> Lars >>=20 >>=20 >=20 --Apple-Mail=_5D8F580A-D5D0-4AF2-B8C1-9586B00F8AD3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEmpq0ZpSoejRmyhheVLXDCb9wwVcFAmG6IKIACgkQVLXDCb9w wVdvyxAAnmWvE7Q6jYSPBzUJXqyyg47iwsqHJiNDSQFdlf0KY3jPDqJan0So7rbW DJ3ERQcw54HtZEbLpdPDZ4Ze+i+mN1FMbm74RdOvBfBa3sXdZ2mdSRdx5RVjGKl7 IVbF+4u9MBv1GnZTKun1mNlNvd5eZLcMjI+f66zCxkeVAcTs0FrJFDvvBF8wXqlE B9EDVWpZuEQpPFGAHUXKxmnklqksu9fEfNfTy/4e1EKZqictWIH5lxbduvG2uXm+ Si1GTt29CiD8kC/3gyU1a7+tM0P4gie+qP4jKna9pXZ4rPOxjJE/Zl//8cVFvGpa vd5740VofWJQcqzHSNaW2VbZaL8OROEVFgWGE1BQoyVrzc0ootlhuBGXNS+g1774 ftbwsc72REStpq7TiJM3iPgw9PQ5Da0V4xX3Z1HLmJKIEDtYiJKENV0mljyHDGyF u/hGDVknyEcRXoW0QQoTI4/Fl8KhcXXVVn9PZAVXBw+NoMUmbawcGQDqZsHAWmRg 75/mycgZdlTvltijOmlIzxUNFItQqKErVSZTElpU9LaKJCzTrunHq3XFYq8Mpylp C3WtLcpCQa5Y6eW/O/YNOFDTJyL5Wm29N9pwq445Bb1f1DQUGPfPJ7iGampMandW NIVibIspqZjnokAzBjc+BoyT56YHkDdxeVrI3BEcZe9VDzVABGs= =TE7d -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_5D8F580A-D5D0-4AF2-B8C1-9586B00F8AD3-- From nobody Wed Dec 15 17:34:16 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8541F3A03EA; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 17:34:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.497 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.497 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.399, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ua_LhMAMB3tu; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 17:34:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (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 04EDE3A03EE; Wed, 15 Dec 2021 17:34:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from mit.edu ([24.16.140.251]) (authenticated bits=56) (User authenticated as kaduk@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 1BG1XgN6016255 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 15 Dec 2021 20:33:48 -0500 Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2021 17:33:42 -0800 From: Benjamin Kaduk To: Lars Eggert Cc: Pete Resnick , gendispatch@ietf.org, The IESG , gendispatch-chairs@ietf.org Message-ID: <20211216013342.GD11486@mit.edu> References: <163842543502.20877.4835523817199553759@ietfa.amsl.com> <01D32738-3C5B-4EB7-B0CF-33343C187969@episteme.net> <21FE53D5-D4E8-4978-BBCC-92719589EED7@eggert.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <21FE53D5-D4E8-4978-BBCC-92719589EED7@eggert.org> Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on charter-ietf-gendispatch-01-00: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2021 01:34:09 -0000 On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 05:26:22PM +0200, Lars Eggert wrote: > Hi, > > based on what Pete wrote, my suggestion is to replace: > > > Work related to the IAB, IRTF, and RFC Editor processes is out of scope. > > with > > Work related to the IAB, IRTF, and RFC Editor processes are out of scope, > but when discussions in GENDISPATCH identify such work items, they can > be suggested to those bodies for action. > > Thoughts? That seems like it would reduce my confusion, and seems reasonable to me. Thanks, Ben From nobody Thu Dec 16 06:19:46 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A5B13A0FC5; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 06:19:33 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.099 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vvtg_xEteeYK; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 06:19:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:211:32ff:fe22:186f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0C9473A0F02; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 06:19:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:c4eb:1479:77a2:3087]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B817B606EC6; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 16:18:47 +0200 (EET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1639664327; bh=pjt4ctkU0feCUaPmgpzJefIjHZ7cZXZJvSud0cFI7XY=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=TUwURYzl1rXYZBYwaCJzgEXjSXJFiuicZ55k+QsKkUKvtRhENakLybHN9aNu+YHcS z6VS1m0N0NyCMuuOzqX3TCfUElqblvHdXrLc/xcnVTCoO8fQYmuEZyLChhNkiLHz2H sRJXnktFdiyw3hVvgnO5TdbvZEscrIvDhHaUQ+VE= Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_5B4C6ABB-3D5E-4C30-94D9-72E8FD20FC54"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.40.0.1.81\)) From: Lars Eggert In-Reply-To: <20211216013342.GD11486@mit.edu> Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2021 16:18:46 +0200 Cc: Pete Resnick , GENDISPATCH List , The IESG , gendispatch-chairs@ietf.org Message-Id: <3F22B124-B6CE-4AFB-B8CC-E13E72E8D16B@eggert.org> References: <163842543502.20877.4835523817199553759@ietfa.amsl.com> <01D32738-3C5B-4EB7-B0CF-33343C187969@episteme.net> <21FE53D5-D4E8-4978-BBCC-92719589EED7@eggert.org> <20211216013342.GD11486@mit.edu> To: Benjamin Kaduk X-MailScanner-ID: B817B606EC6.A4CF5 X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on charter-ietf-gendispatch-01-00: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2021 14:19:36 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_5B4C6ABB-3D5E-4C30-94D9-72E8FD20FC54 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On 2021-12-16, at 3:33, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > That seems like it would reduce my confusion, and seems reasonable to = me. Thanks. I just submitted charter-ietf-gendispatch-01-02, which has that = change. Lars --Apple-Mail=_5B4C6ABB-3D5E-4C30-94D9-72E8FD20FC54 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEmpq0ZpSoejRmyhheVLXDCb9wwVcFAmG7SsYACgkQVLXDCb9w wVc8NBAAid4fWHN2e+Z1s3ciy+WXdrAY+YFK49EBAD+oprgsh1Zfpe6rQ2d7VPy0 m5lC5AkQninn82Hp/8jUIJ/nPvXEq4TmwRExZid4yu1m7PbXF+g6b/zN7YHQ98SY oMi6HO0674UARsDJt0I4gxvCk9uhRtosHS6Skjmjh+o88UdARlACys7RA8pwARYD hfFshd3CiOxh1MaGBx2Cazed+9Vt6f3USclCLTb0X/LmN03H1X4pEk4QykBduXek f3iLe+UyCxa/O/fRZtVy2Tpa8FpuH8EqeKCrXCD1Zn0dg/+DkDxrBOg6dDslUGdr u0q4BvxQC/sjtHUzVL7VmpDUz6N8TaI7Co1vCUc9oN8Vub4dwamWYlMYAy4qTHqF baueVYFxjokd9GO2Unm/Mdx5Pqq9FcRHXLx8sXo8omFPannC32DWiQEHBxYA/9/l b08s+yK3ptOsNmEwEIBa4ZCsjRpa3e9ODJq+4P7OEuTVmgGnSjAJbCeLKmPRPIEk aa22FD5FBfw+B/WySoC5BfZh7zkK9s3Tz+yy81Zcu+tA+nIvUu4e+l3kTEJwBIv7 IIlXvchJ51Ayd/vI61I1JspJbdBHsruoIvvO6RdqGG2YOk0YKs47LrZR1S8KyDuI aNynQPfbVsDK6A7aktKfgFTF3SX1tBAaj0QQ/B2gj/Z6vg2T3Kw= =/hSL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Apple-Mail=_5B4C6ABB-3D5E-4C30-94D9-72E8FD20FC54-- From nobody Thu Dec 16 07:58:24 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11C603A103F for ; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 07:58:20 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.697 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.697 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=elandsys.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DpqiaZJTYHCy for ; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 07:58:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38E563A103E for ; Thu, 16 Dec 2021 07:58:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from DESKTOP-K6V9C2L.elandsys.com ([102.115.171.199]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id 1BGFvMcS022103 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 16 Dec 2021 07:57:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1639670273; x=1639756673; i=@elandsys.com; bh=X53hTe1ICFeh8TmDsJsTtK2S/hgZEUdHbnFZg6rACPA=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References; b=Ys10oACCJkzLGOk2XqsmhpcUSLh0FIGiTTie1WbtGVBMRCgKOva2q4qQ/kb6f5yWK 0s/lz5aRzph3o8urPJ9dhi0lBDVb0qqyVwOJoMVbBFQ6RnCZyvd5Pz5t1afOEzOnko QTxpYsquLKKlMl4cVqS5XEvWdorbfrH3dWD+BUIA= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20211216075453.07968448@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2021 07:56:20 -0800 To: Tony Rutkowski , gendispatch@ietf.org From: S Moonesamy In-Reply-To: References: <163595251682.11706.5053299985084837548@ietfa.amsl.com> <8854c3cc-694b-1a7f-ebc8-47bed9bb4e0f@joelhalpern.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20211208144553.0b318fd8@elandnews.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-01.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2021 15:58:20 -0000 Hi Tony, At 08:32 AM 09-12-2021, Tony Rutkowski wrote: >See Understanding "Balance" Requirements for Standards-Development >Organizations (utah.edu) Thank you for the informative link. I also read https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/file/1437421/download Regards, S. Moonesamy From nobody Fri Dec 17 10:36:46 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietf.org Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11D683A079E; Fri, 17 Dec 2021 10:36:36 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: The IESG To: "IETF-Announce" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 7.41.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Cc: The IESG , gendispatch-chairs@ietf.org, gendispatch@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <163976619605.11006.2352823197656213613@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021 10:36:36 -0800 Archived-At: Subject: [Gendispatch] WG Action: Rechartered General Area Dispatch (gendispatch) X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2021 18:36:36 -0000 The General Area Dispatch (gendispatch) WG in the General Area of the IETF has been rechartered. For additional information, please contact the Area Directors or the WG Chairs. General Area Dispatch (gendispatch) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Current status: Active WG Chairs: Pete Resnick Kirsty Paine Assigned Area Director: Lars Eggert General Area Directors: Lars Eggert Mailing list: Address: gendispatch@ietf.org To subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch Archive: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gendispatch/ Group page: https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/gendispatch/ Charter: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-gendispatch/ The GENDISPATCH working group is a DISPATCH-style working group (see RFC 7957) chartered to consider proposals for new work in the GEN area, including proposals for changes or improvements to the IETF process and process documents. GENDISPATCH is chartered to identify, or to help create, an appropriate venue for new work. GENDISPATCH will not consider any technical standardization work. Guiding principles for proposed new work include: 1. Providing a clear problem statement, historical context, motivation, and deliverables for the proposed new work. 2. Ensuring there has been adequate mailing list discussion reflecting sufficient interest, enough individuals have expressed a willingness to contribute (if appropriate given the subject matter of the proposal) and there is WG consensus before new work is dispatched. 3. Looking for and identifying commonalities and overlap among published or ongoing work in the GEN area, the IESG, the IAB, the IETF LLC, the IRTF, other SDOs, or the wider technical community. Options for handling new work include: - Directing the work to an existing WG. - Developing a proposal for a BOF. - Developing a charter for a new WG. - Making recommendations that documents be AD-sponsored (which ADs may or may not choose to follow). - Requesting that relevant bodies, including but not limited to the IESG, the IAB, the IRTF, or the IETF LLC, consider taking up the work in some form. - Deferring the decision for the new work. - Rejecting the new work. If GENDISPATCH decides that a particular topic needs to be addressed by a new WG, the normal IETF chartering process will be followed, including, for instance, IETF-wide review of the proposed charter. Proposals for large work efforts SHOULD lead to a BOF where the topic can be discussed in front of the entire IETF community. Documents progressed as AD-sponsored would typically include those that are extremely simple or make minor updates to existing process documents. Proposed new work may be deferred in cases where GENDISPATCH does not have enough information for the chairs to determine consensus. New work may be rejected in cases where there is not sufficient interest in GENDISPATCH or the proposal has been considered and rejected in the past, unless a substantially revised proposal is put forth, including compelling new reasons for accepting the work. A major objective of GENDISPATCH is to provide timely, clear dispositions of new efforts. Thus, where there is consensus to take on new work, GENDISPATCH will strive to quickly find a home for it (usually within a few months). While most new work in the GEN area is expected to be considered in GENDISPATCH, there may be times when that is not appropriate. At the discretion of the GEN AD, new efforts may follow other paths. For example, work may go directly to a BOF, may be initiated in other working groups when it clearly belongs in that group, or may be directly AD-sponsored. While it is inevitable that some discussion of the merits of a proposal brought to GENDISPATCH are necessary in order to evaluate the appropriate disposition of the proposal, GENDISPATCH is not chartered to actually do the work proposed. As part of the dispatch, a venue for further discussion should be identified. The existence of GENDISPATCH does not change the IESG's responsibilities and discretion as described in RFC 3710. Work related to the IAB, IRTF, and RFC Editor processes is out of scope, but when discussions in GENDISPATCH identify such work items, they can be suggested to those bodies for action. From nobody Wed Dec 22 09:39:08 2021 Return-Path: X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0F753A0B0E for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 09:39:03 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.976 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DEAR_SOMETHING=1.973, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.852, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V992kejjVmLo for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 09:38:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-qk1-x72f.google.com (mail-qk1-x72f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 18C1E3A0B0C for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 09:38:59 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qk1-x72f.google.com with SMTP id p4so3006880qkm.7 for ; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 09:38:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language :references:from:to:in-reply-to; bh=NnqZSIYHsXmXOVDtLgxnbcx4MRpSCnIk4WPrzwpJCsU=; b=dqBtiXx9vt+6ETngzilNdgih9gitIgQC0lJkWSqt2FMWtg0FPNLigkzEcQDLExxJwe WM7a1KX/A64uVlPkjZjPa3gO8E3gukml0cE70hsgCCGfPcCQcds5o9r/00WcbSQuB5Vc YW0cci+oAuOo2ra85ba2sGnQslWmYHvVzbBOcbb9OfuuOo5gtWlU+YWMP774QY11/asO mZWuJcvP+Zn2huhWwaLnbdyAIXrT2g1YxI/iokQ+7WgpQ8wDBiyklV0USU0tNR7g3Ud3 a5d1kEhZCDm4A7CYpcEdXrsyYRhttXQ6yk2qRMsU4eiejHl7eHaUlqdgcPGmZcn/6e9e 9l5Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:references:from:to:in-reply-to; bh=NnqZSIYHsXmXOVDtLgxnbcx4MRpSCnIk4WPrzwpJCsU=; b=q+59Cyv/mYOHOlKBJYt/aAVZPdVwKRHlzIA1oeXuXcXh9IRx7N2l+pdjbtoS3T8WXU YWvwZYwPspEJ3SieMQOKxmikkU+I6xmqPmxf8tu55iDK26qdsCrgrYdUk+fpyf1Yezt9 fESS43OswtJ4gssqPcgVGsulaMPyxBTzyF0Zy2MvvGOvaKn9HnYc4qUHIhNMf9oMwXrc VJ251iYpM7ANI/l8KrlO6MZuo21/Gochq3wba/l2MVBmmILBLsXBL3QMy/z+8+KeNEsW bIrf9VctZdU11tAzQhWV3mWvoc2CCJYrg9dm6pUegjd1VjR7WAYpWhxf8n4gIQGWxm9j Y8ow== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53282PzETLGYJ8hFIlZMLl2M8MS9QMhPcs9/01BaRYJ4PCUF7i41 k/Q41tz9TneaQkOSVMaOJFMFh8Dd6Zc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy1NoKQzMMlr4KAxCph/bsAXwtmxEbD7mzcdUEfsbLCRetOH6OCQtkdjelG1c/J9Vv/bSN0xw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:1902:: with SMTP id bj2mr2723835qkb.532.1640194737292; Wed, 22 Dec 2021 09:38:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.249] (pool-70-106-224-166.clppva.fios.verizon.net. [70.106.224.166]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c25sm2437340qkp.31.2021.12.22.09.38.56 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 22 Dec 2021 09:38:56 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------BH0MoDoieM0y5a1D0S8LVJ0T" Message-ID: Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 12:38:56 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.4.1 Content-Language: en-US References: From: Tony Rutkowski To: gendispatch@ietf.org In-Reply-To: X-Forwarded-Message-Id: Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] I-D Action: draft-halpern-gendispatch-antitrust-01.txt X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: General Area Dispatch List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2021 17:39:04 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------BH0MoDoieM0y5a1D0S8LVJ0T Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit This litigation and notice could well occur in the IETF and underscores the importance of having substantive antitrust policies.  --amr > The complete file (and annexes if any) of this Collective Letter can > be downloaded at the following location: > https://docbox.etsi.org/C_Letter/CL2021/CL21_3811_Litigation.docx > > *To:                  ETSI MEMBERS AND COUNSELLORS* > > *Subject:         Litigation* > > Dear Madam, > > Dear Sir, > > We wish to inform you that, on 17^th December 2021, Thales has > initiated legal proceedings against Philips and ETSI. > > We are summoned to appear before the Paris court of first instance on > 7^th July 2022, for a first procedural hearing. > > Both Thales and Philips are ETSI members. > > Pursuant to the writ of summons, Thales and Philips, are in dispute > about the conditions of a licence agreement covering certain patents > declared by Philips as being essential to the UMTS and LTE standards. > > In 2020, Philips has filed complaints against Thales before the US > International Trade Commission and in the US District Court for the > District of Delaware. > > Before the Paris Court, Thales claims that Philips violates article > 101 (forbidden agreements restricting competition in the internal > market) and article 102 (abuse of dominant position) of the Treaty on > the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and article 47 of the EU > Charter of Fundamental Rights (right to an effective remedy and to a > fair trial). > > With respect to ETSI, Thales contends the following: > >  •        Breach of article 101.1 of TFEU for not having taken > sanctions against Philips in consideration of Philips breaches of ETSI > Rules, and for not having applied articles 8 and 14 of the ETSI IPR > Policy. > >  •        Accomplice of breach of article 47 of the Charter of > Fundamental Rights of the European Union arising out of the > aforementioned breach. > >  •        Condemn ETSI to pay 1 € as damages. > > Please note that, in order to protect our rights and prepare our > defence, we do not wish to comment the said claims at such an early > stage. > > Please also note that we let Thales and Philips manage their > communication regarding the case. > > We will keep you informed of the evolution of this litigation as > appropriate. > > For your information, you will find in Annex copy of the above-cited > articles. > > Yours faithfully, > > Luis Jorge Romero Saro > > Director-General > --------------BH0MoDoieM0y5a1D0S8LVJ0T Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

This litigation and notice could well occur in the IETF and underscores the importance of having substantive antitrust policies.  --amr

 

The complete file (and annexes if any) of this Collective Letter can be downloaded at the following location: https://docbox.etsi.org/C_Letter/CL2021/CL21_3811_Litigation.docx

 

To:                  ETSI MEMBERS AND COUNSELLORS

Subject:         Litigation

 

 

Dear Madam,

Dear Sir,

 

 

We wish to inform you that, on 17th December 2021, Thales has initiated legal proceedings against Philips and ETSI.

 

We are summoned to appear before the Paris court of first instance on 7th July 2022, for a first procedural hearing.

 

Both Thales and Philips are ETSI members.

 

Pursuant to the writ of summons, Thales and Philips, are in dispute about the conditions of a licence agreement covering certain patents declared by Philips as being essential to the UMTS and LTE standards.

 

In 2020, Philips has filed complaints against Thales before the US International Trade Commission and in the US District Court for the District of Delaware.

 

Before the Paris Court, Thales claims that Philips violates article 101 (forbidden agreements restricting competition in the internal market) and article 102 (abuse of dominant position) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and article 47 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial).

 

With respect to ETSI, Thales contends the following:

 •        Breach of article 101.1 of TFEU for not having taken sanctions against Philips in consideration of Philips breaches of ETSI Rules, and for not having applied articles 8 and 14 of the ETSI IPR Policy.

 •        Accomplice of breach of article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union arising out of the aforementioned breach.

 •        Condemn ETSI to pay 1 € as damages.

 

Please note that, in order to protect our rights and prepare our defence, we do not wish to comment the said claims at such an early stage.

 

Please also note that we let Thales and Philips manage their communication regarding the case.

 

We will keep you informed of the evolution of this litigation as appropriate.

 

For your information, you will find in Annex copy of the above-cited articles.

 

Yours faithfully,

 

 

Luis Jorge Romero Saro

Director-General

--------------BH0MoDoieM0y5a1D0S8LVJ0T--