ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Request for community guidance on issue concerning a future meeting of the IETF

2009-09-26 14:12:05

On Sat, 26 Sep 2009, Dean Willis wrote:

Because China's policy on censoring the Internet sucks, and we have 
a moral and ethical responsibility to make the Internet available 
despite that policy. If this requires technology changes, then that 
technology is within our purview. If it requires operational 
changes, then those operational changes are within our purview. If 
it requires political changes, then those changes are within our 
purview. Governments with policies like the PRC's are the enemy, to 
be defeated by all means technical, operational, and political. This 
can lead to some heated statements.

Dave beat me to it but:

"We have a moral and ethical responsibility" ? Who is "we" here. Does 
it include the several hundred folks from China who regularly 
participate either in our meetings or online?

Does the IETF charter require us to do this? Are we supposed to 
overthrow governments as part of this? If so, do we have a ranked
list, or should we just do it alphabetically?

Look, I am not in any way trying to defend the policy in question as 
something I agree with, but I cannot agree that we as a GROUP should 
be engaged in the politcal actions you suggest. Should we take a 
stance on universal health care while we're at it?



The question: does meeting in China do more to further the goal of
getting past PRC (and others) deplorable policies than does meeting
elsewhere AND LETTING THE WORLD KNOW WHY WE ARE NOT MEETING IN CHINA.
That's an open question, I'm not at all certain of the answer, and we
have to analyze financial risk of that hotel contract given the
situation. We also have to analyze the financial risk with regard to
agents who may try to turn an IETF meeting into a political incident.

Dean

Understood. I think the financial risks (in the event of a shut down)
are low due to my reading of that probability, but I am also concerned
about what effect this will have on (at least some people's) behavior.
We should not, I agree, not have to change our normal way of doing the
work of the IETF and we should not put ourselves in a situation where
a substatial people stay away from the meeting regardless of their
reasons for doing so.

Regarding "agents" I have no way of evaluating that possibility and I 
am not sure anyone can.

This is why we asked you.

Ole
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>