Subject: [hrpc] Concern about the path HRPC is on

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 01:36:59 -0500

Hi,

I have been relatively silent during most of the conversations. This was
largely because I wanted to see where the discussions went and what
emerged that might help in the research goals.

At this point I am worried that the group may be losing its way and I do
hold myself somewhat responsible for being a bit too hands off in the
discussions.  Instead of focusing on research goals, like taking the
hypotheses presented in RFC8280 and testing them and measuring results,
we are starting to act as if we were an IETF human rights directorate,
in the position to tell groups in the IETF what they should and should
not be doing about their work.  While individuals are always free to act
that way, it is not the job of the HRPC as a research group to do so.

I see this as a problem because we are part of the IRTF and not the
IETF.  And while we may complete our work at some point and give
recommendation to the IETF about establishing Human Rights Protocol
Considerations within the IETF, we are not chartered to direct the
activities of the IETF WGs in any manner whatsoever.  There is supposed
to be a gulf between the IETF and the IRTF.  And while we have made a
good start with RFC8280 of a theoretical framework for our work, we have
not yet done conclusive work on establishing that there are useful human
rights consideration that can be used generally on Internet protocols
and architectures.  We may mostly believe it and we  have taken first
steps, but are not yet, in my opinion, at the point of having proven the
point sufficiently for those who do not approach it with prior belief. 

I think we need to find our way back to research goals on both the
follow-up to RFC8280 and on the other drafts that have been accepted by
the RG as RG docs.  What does it mean to research these issues and what
does it take to produce the analysis, evidence and measurements that
show the hypothetical work to be worthy of export to the IETF for their
ultimate consideration and possible acceptance?

Mallory and I, as co-chairs, will be meeting with the Allison Mankin in
her role as IRTF chair, to discuss the situation in this group and to
start to think about how we get back on track and might take it forward
in a research manner. 

Thanks

avri

---

From: Melinda Shore <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 21:55:21 -0900

> emerged that might help in the research goals.

Hi, and thanks for this.  For the little (very little, I suspect) it's
worth it seems to me that it's increasingly common for research groups
to wander into engineering space.  I'm not sure I want to get into a
discussion of why that's happening but my general sense is that it's
pulled, or threatened to pull, a few RGs off the rails.  That is to
say, while this may be the most visible instance of the problem it's
certainly not alone.

I think the human rights protocols reviews have been useful but I've
also wondered if they haven't blurred a few lines (plus consumed
calories that might have been spent elsewhere).

Melinda

-- 
Melinda Shore
[email-masked]

Software longa, hardware brevis

---

From: "Eliot Lear (elear)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 08:33:34 +0000

Avri.

The questions you asked below:

> What does it mean to research these issues and what

are really good ones.  And it seems to me the paper reference you posted is a great way to start that discussion (its intent, after all).  As an engineer, I tend to gravitate toward engineering conversations.  It’s my comfort zone.  I think this is true with others as well.  I would really like to be more of a spectator, and the direction you are taking gives me confidence that I can be (he says, noting the irony of having emailed this note in the first place).

Eliot