----- Original Message ----- From: Melinda Shore <melinda.shore@xxxxxxxxx> To: <ietf@xxxxxxxx> Sent: 11/06/2020 03:39:51 On 6/10/20 6:21 PM, Jay Daley wrote: > As well as stating that you see this a switch from a zero to non-zero > fee, I think you’ve also stated that such a switch can only be made with > community consensus. Given that you and some others firmly oppose this > switch it would seem that community consensus could not be achieved > within the necessary timeframe to make such as switch for IETF 108, if > at all, no matter what process was used to try to find consensus. Well, I don't know about that. Stephen can (and does, with admirable vigor) make his own arguments but from my perspective this discussion really hasn't grappled in any meaningful way with the question of openness and the IETF's working method. Introducing a fee for all remote participation in IETF meetings introduces a new barrier to participation[*]. It's not simply about the money, per se. And if we're introducing barriers to participation in ways that impact the openness of the process, it does seem inappropriate to do that without some fairly deliberate community discussion. <tp> Melinda Some time ago, access to the datatracker was changed such that it is inaccessible to older PC such as I sometimes use. I can access IETF, FTP, IANA, e-mail ... along with lots of websites for businesses that want me to buy something from them but not the datatracker. I assume that this was an update to the security, a new level of TLS or a new ciphersuite or .... To overcome this I have to spend hundreds, maybe a thousand or so dollars to upgrade hardware and software which I currently choose not to. Doubtless the Security Area could give me an irrelevant explanation of how much better things are - I just see another barrier to participation introduced without any explanation that I can recall. I put the use of I-D in ASCII as one of the great features of the IETF making access easy - by contrast, the increased use of GitHub takes the IETF in the opposite direction. So the Jay has expressed surprise at the views expressed at what the LLC has or has not a remit to do but that is widely true; there is a folk memory of how things used to be and a resistance to changing some of them :-) I do think that the LLC has taken pragmatic, I might say engineering, decisions in the face of the unknown and that the procedures of the IETF make it rather slow to turn the juggernaut around. Tom Petch ps Software longa, hardware brevis I do not understand this and yes I do know Latin --- New Outlook Express and Windows Live Mail replacement - get it here: https://www.oeclassic.com/ Melinda [*] The fee waiver program strikes me as a bandaid, not a solution. -- Melinda Shore melinda.shore@xxxxxxxxx Software longa, hardware brevis
