My resignation

Sun Apr 19 02:04:49 CEST 2009

Hello

LB's message included Vint Cerf's IDNA list message to remove posting
privileges. In that context, I am cross posting another message from which
explains the rationale very clealy:

this mailing list is intended to help this working group fulfill its
charter. It is not a general purpose list for having discussions about
re-design of DNS, theories of linguistics, general semiotics, etc. The
persons whom I have banned from posting are not contributing to the specific
work of the working group. in fact, they are distracting from it. They are
free to create their own mailing lists (cf. Google Groups for instance) to
have these more general discussions.

vint cerf
Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
http://isocmadras.blogspot.com

On Sun, Apr 19, 2009 at 3:44 AM, Steve Crocker <steve at shinkuro.com> wrote:

> LB,
> 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.
>
> Steve Crocker
>
>
>
>
> 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.
>
> *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.
>
> *French text:*
> 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.com>
> Date: 2009/4/18
> Subject: Re: [listegenerale] Removal of posting privileges
> To: Vint Cerf <vint at google.com>
> Cc : listegenerale at franceatlarge.org, housley at vigilsec.com, lisa Dusseault
> <lisa at osafoundation.org>, Idna-update at alvestrand.no, lisa Dusseault <
> lisa.dusseault at messagingarchitects.com>
>
>
> 2009/4/18 Vint Cerf <vint at google.com>
> >
> > Harald,
> > please remove the posting privileges of the email addresses:
> >
> > renardinr at gmail.com    "remy renardin"
> > xlegoff at gmail.com     "xavier legoff"
> >
> > These posters show no ability to participate constructively in the
> consensus building process.
> > Vint Cerf
> > Chair, IDNABIS
> > _______________________________________________
> > Idna-update mailing list
> > Idna-update at alvestrand.no
> > http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update
> >
>
> 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 Skype.
>
> 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 competition.
>
> 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.
>
> Xavier Legoff
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> listegenerale mailing list
> listegenerale at franceatlarge.org
> http://franceatlarge.org/mailman/listinfo/listegenerale_franceatlarge.org
>
> --
> LB
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf mailing list
> Ietf at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idna-update mailing list
> Idna-update at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/idna-update
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.alvestrand.no/pipermail/idna-update/attachments/20090419/8477b4db/attachment-0001.htm 