ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: IETF chair's blog

2013-02-25 01:00:14
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256


        I meant outreach, not collaborate.

        In the case of collaboration I agree with you. Although today we use
webex that does not seem to open to me (at least not more than FB,
Google+ and twitter).

        In the case of outreach it does not matter to me if we are using
closed or open applications.

/as

On 25/02/2013 14:52, Brian Trammell wrote:
Hi, Arturo, all,

It does not seem appropriate for a technical standards organization
dedicated to making the Internet work better through the
development of open standards to implicitly endorse "communication
protocols" which are based on closed access to distributed
databases through interfaces that can and do change at the whim of
the organizations that control them, further where those
organizations have demonstrated a willingness to assert editorial
control over the content they disseminate.

If a social network were to emerge that allows open participation
at _every_ level, based on an open application protocol therefor,
that would be something different. I fear that network effects have
already made  such a thing unlikely in this iteration of "Internet
x.0".

(Aside: I myself have used all three listed networks to get
attention for ISOC functions at the chapter level, though I'm
uneasy about that. I won't dispute that they're great for outreach,
and when you're doing outreach, you have to go where the people
are. In my defense, though, I was advertising a talk wherein I
discussed why it's a bad idea to rely on such closed platforms. :)
)

Cheers,

Brian

On Feb 25, 2013, at 2:21 AM, Arturo Servin <aservin(_at_)lacnic(_dot_)net>
wrote:


Why not?

I, my organization and many more (included ISOC) have found them
very useful for outreach activities. I do not see why the IETF
shouldn't. Please, tell me.


as

Sent from my iPad

On 25 Feb 2013, at 02:21, Marc Petit-Huguenin <petithug(_at_)acm(_dot_)org>
wrote:

On 02/23/2013 07:38 PM, Arturo Servin wrote:

Very good initiative.

Twitter, Google+, Facebook, etc. could be the next steps.
Let's embrace new tools to collaborate.

Let's not.  Collaboration based on software running on servers run
by the IETF or a contractor payed by the IETF is fine.  Using
collaboration tools owned by the entities you listed, or similar
entities, is not.


Regards, as

On 22/02/2013 20:35, IETF Chair wrote:
Jari has created a blog as an experiment to see if would
be possible to provide periodic status reports and other
thoughts from the chair. Here's the link:

http://www.ietf.org/blog/2013/02/chairs-blog/


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.17 (Darwin)
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iF4EAREIAAYFAlErC94ACgkQr8mvgVZWPglc7wD/ZpaDDjPL8QYgcZrQH0xX+KD/
WOypj8I57wHOnJcfGNcA/jErGblgtaJuhgde5og6u5SE80bqmJBqcyxXfxUv/WOK
=37Ql
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

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