Re: My resignation
I have been following much of this dialog and I am familiar with the
general set of issues involved here. I have also been around for a
long time, and I do not work for Google nor do I depend on them for
income. I now serve on the Board of ICANN and I served on the Board
of ISOC from 2003 to 2006. I was heavily involved in creating the
present financial support structure for the IETF, i.e. the creation of
the IASA, its oversight board IAOC, and the funding arrangements now
in place to support the IETF.
Your third paragraph, "I understand that the IETF've become a
subsidiary of ISOC ... this is too much control in one place" is
simply wrong. The IETF is extremely sensitive about its independence
and avoidance of capture by large interests. All of the parties you
named fully understand the need for independence and work carefully to
preserve it. Moreover, Vint Cerf, though he works for Google, is
above reproach and contributes enormous amounts of his time to public
service that are not controlled by or aligned with Google's interests.
The IETF is founded on the principle that participation is by
individuals, not organizations. No organization, no matter whether it
is large or small, controls the IETF processes.
Restricting of posting privileges to a working group is done
reluctantly, rarely, and only after very substantial effort has been
expended to find useful ways to interact. It is unfortunate such
action was required in this case. I know Vint and everyone wishes it
had not been necessary. However, after lengthy interaction and many
attempts to keep the discussion focused on the topic, it was necessary.
On Apr 18, 2009, at 5:46 PM, LB wrote:
Dear IETF Members,
Sorry, I do not speak but I read Engslih. I use Google translation.
JFC Morfin asked me to interface our working groups, france @ large,
with the IETF. I was badly received by some. Then I had the chance
to talk with serious people, respectful of my ignorance, mindful of
my user inputs. I participated in the WG-IDNABIS and I could share
here, with dedicated people, wishing to work for the common good.
They were also subject to the problem of financing by sponsors
described by the IAB in RFC 3869.
Today, two brilliant and dedicated contributors to the WG-IDNABIS
have been banned, in a quarter of an hour. By decision and execution
of members of Google.
I understand that the IETF've become a subsidiary of ISOC and the
consortium of its biggest members. I understand that Google pays its
expenses. I understand the enormous interests involved to control
the global namespace (rather than just domain names, but the words
of semantic processing). However, one root for the IPs, one root for
the DNS, one root for languages, and now a root for the spelling of
words, this is too much control in one place.
I'm too old for that. I quit after copying the mail of one of the
deportees that you did not receive. It is important because it is
very firm, but it also calls for reconciliation in a practical
manner. I hope that the other expelled, will do the same.
JFC Morfin m'avait demandé d'interfacer nos groupes de travail,
france(_at_)large, avec l'IETF. J'ai d'abord été méchament accueilli par
certains. Puis j'ai eu la chance de discuter avec des gens sérieux,
respectueux de mes ignorances, soucieux de mes apports
d'utilisateur. J'ai participé au WG-IDNABIS et j'ai pu échanger là,
avec des gens dévoués, désirant travailler pour le bien commun. Ils
étaient aussi soumis au problème du financement par les sponsors
décrit par l'IAB dans la RFC 3869.
Aujourd'hui, deux membres brilants et dédiés contributeurs du WG-
IDNABIS ont été bannis, en un quart d'heure. Par décision et
exécution de Membres de Google.
Je comprends que l'IETF ai du devenir une filliale de l'ISOC et le
consortium de ses plus gros membres. Je comprends que Google paie
ses dépenses. Je comprends les énormes intérêts en jeu pour
contrôler le nommage mondial (non plus seulement les noms de
domaine, mais les mots des processeurs sémantiques). Cependant, une
racine pour les IPs, une racine pour le DNS, une racine pour les
langues, et maintenant une racine pour l'orthographe des termes,
cela fait trop de contrôle dans un seul endroit.
Je suis trop vieux pour cela. Je démissionne après avoir copié le
mail d'un des expulsés que vous n'avez pu recevoir. Il est important
car il est trés ferme, mais il appelle aussi à la réconciliation de
façon pratique. J'espère que l'autre expulsé, fera de même.
JFC je reste dans le groupe de travail et au comptoir. Enlève moi
partout ailleurs. Explique mon départ. Je suis écoeuré pour
l'instant. Je sais que tu comprendras. De tout coeur avec ce que
Patrick Yeu veut dire. Il faut vivre avec ces gens là pour
comprendre combien ils sont pénibles, mais aussi parfois magnifiques.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Xavier Legoff <xlegoff(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
Subject: Re: [listegenerale] Removal of posting privileges
To: Vint Cerf <vint(_at_)google(_dot_)com>
Cc : listegenerale(_at_)franceatlarge(_dot_)org, housley(_at_)vigilsec(_dot_)com, lisa
Dusseault <lisa(_at_)osafoundation(_dot_)org>, Idna-update(_at_)alvestrand(_dot_)no, lisa
2009/4/18 Vint Cerf <vint(_at_)google(_dot_)com>
> please remove the posting privileges of the email addresses:
> renardinr(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com "remy renardin"
> xlegoff(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com "xavier legoff"
> These posters show no ability to participate constructively in the
consensus building process.
> Vint Cerf
> Chair, IDNABIS
> Idna-update mailing list
Dear Mr. Cerf,
I am afraid that this is an ukase.
Yet, there is no king or tsar in the IETF.
You are welcome to enable your company to benefit from the IETF
along the new ISOC vision, in order to exclude your competition and
users, but at least do this while respecting the IETF rules.
We have sufficiently proven time and time again that we participate
constructively. We have provided enough information to seriously
support our position: now it is up to the governments, experts,
managers, and users to judge.
The only problem that we have observed thus far is that consensus
was headed our way. We have no doubt that the technical solution,
which the Internet will eventually use, will be rather near the one
that clearly not only we support. Maybe this is because we are the
users and - how large can it really be? - a single operator only
lives off of the money of its respective users.
I cannot prejudge the position of others, as I only joined JFC via
1) We request people to NOT DoS this WG. Please wait for the
IDNA2008 to be presented to the IETF/LC. The only need for
interoperability with any ML-DNS solution/application, of any kind
or by anyone, is for the Charter to be respected: i.e. no mapping at
the protocol level.
2) Please do NOT claim that there is a COI. There is a simple WG
management problem that was created by someone who needs to reread
the IETF rules, who in turn thought himself to be exclusive, and now
has to tackle an unexpected technical clarification in order to
address a problem (missing presentation layer) that many eventually
thought was a feature.
Google is important for the Internet and we all benefit from it.
Moreover, their last quarterly results show that they are confronted
with their centralized architecture problem earlier than was
expected due to the current crisis.
As their users, we now have to accompany them in their very long way
to go to the fully distributed people centric architecture that we
consensually agreed upon. We, then, were all of the countries of the
world, civil society, private sector, public powers, international
organizations, and every stakeholder, ... except for the IETF who
might have thought that they could tell all of us, forever, the way
to spell better in our own native languages.
3) Please do NOT harass ISOC for the way that they want to assume
the IETF governance and financing. We have been illegally banned. We
were NOT bought out. However, RFC 3935 certainly has to be enhanced.
We are interested in discussing an RFC 3935bis BOF.
We also have not been banned from ISOC France. Set out to oppose
ISOC only if they also expel us, because in so doing you will
thereby defend the IETF that we truly believe in and that we have
joined through the IUCG: it is not for sale, it is only to serve.
Multilingualization is something complex, in which we are now going
to work on, in peace. This is because we now know that this WG/
IDNABIS is unable to match multilingualization's very prerequisites:
to live with others, to be polite, to be respectful, to care and not
to expel, to inform oneself, not to repeat the same propositions
that did not work, to have some multilingualistic competence and at
least some multilateral spirit. We also want to thank all of its
members who, kindly or more formally, supported us. We hope that
they will pursue and perhaps even complete the job that was
described by the Charter.
Therefore, someone needs to take this job over now. Who, other than
the people and lead users of the world, is better suited for this
job? That task will not be easy. However, there is no other way
around all this, since ISOC sold the soul of the IETF to its
Platinum members, and its Gold members are expelling their
I am surprised to have come to sign such a texte after so short a
time of duty at the IETF. However, I started to like it - in spite
of the egos, blazés, aggressive ones. I want this adventure of
thousands of people building a new world with T-Shirts, to survive
ISOC sponsors' money, political creeps, commercial priorities, and
continue to help us, the users and the people.
listegenerale mailing list
Ietf mailing list
Ietf mailing list