**Session Date/Time:** 10 Nov 2021 16:00

# hrpc

## Summary

The hrpc session included a presentation on the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) by Andrea Esterhuysen, an in-depth review of `draft-irtf-hrpc-guidelines` by IRTF Chair Colin Perkins, and updates on `draft-ietf-hrpc-freedom-of-association` and `draft-irtf-hrpc-feminism-protocols`. The session also covered the ongoing search for an HRPC co-chair. Discussions highlighted the importance of integrating human rights considerations into protocol design and fostered dialogue between the IETF/IRTF and policy-focused communities like the IGF.

## Key Discussion Points

*   **Internet Governance Forum (IGF) Presentation:**
    *   Andrea Esterhuysen provided an overview of the IGF, its origins from WSIS, its multi-stakeholder and bottom-up nature, and its mandate renewal in 2025.
    *   She highlighted the historical struggle to recognize human rights and gender issues as legitimate topics at the IGF.
    *   The IGF 2021 agenda focuses on Economic & Social Inclusion and Human Rights & Universal and Meaningful Access, with cross-cutting areas including Emerging Regulation, Trust Security & Stability, Environment & Climate Change, and Digital Cooperation.
    *   The IGF's role as a deliberative space versus an "output-oriented" body was discussed, noting its value in bringing diverse perspectives for debate, even if not always resulting in consensus or binding outcomes.
    *   Potential for collaboration between HRPC and IGF was emphasized, particularly regarding HRPC's work on impact assessments (human rights and proposed environmental) and fostering mutual understanding between technical and policy communities.
    *   The newly announced IGF Leadership Panel and its call for nominations, including technical community representatives, raised questions about representation and outreach to SDOs (Standards Developing Organizations).

*   **Co-chair Search Update:**
    *   IRTF Chair Colin Perkins reported on the ongoing search for an HRPC co-chair, acknowledging delays in engaging with shortlisted candidates.
    *   The search aims to recruit one or more co-chairs with complementary backgrounds (e.g., sociology, academia, industry) to current civil society representation.
    *   The group noted the flexibility of research groups to integrate interested individuals in various roles beyond traditional co-chair positions.

*   **`draft-irtf-hrpc-guidelines` Review:**
    *   Colin Perkins provided a detailed review of `draft-irtf-hrpc-guidelines-10`, commending its importance and potential usefulness to the community.
    *   **Key feedback points included:**
        *   **Context for Human Rights:** The document needs more explanation of what the listed human rights mean in practice, how they are interpreted across different legal systems and cultures (e.g., US vs. European free speech, GDPR), and concrete examples for engineers.
        *   **Framing:** Shift from a "human rights review" approach to framing considerations as integral to protocol *design* to be less antagonistic.
        *   **Structure and Clarity:** Improve the order and reduce overlap in the list of questions, suggesting editorial refinement.
        *   **Neutrality on Trade-offs:** Adopt a more neutral point of view, explicitly discussing trade-offs involved in design choices (e.g., network neutrality vs. emergency call prioritization, network measurement vs. privacy) rather than advocating a single approach.
        *   **Concrete Actions:** Provide clearer guidance on specific actions protocol designers can take to achieve desired human rights outcomes.
    *   **Authors' Response (Niels ten Oever):** Acknowledged the feedback but emphasized the goal of a practicable document, not re-establishing the extensive theory from RFC 8280 or deep-diving into 194 national regulations. Suggested adding a sentence about varying jurisdictional interpretations and pointing to other documents for detailed rights exploration.
    *   **Chair's Comment (Mallory Knodel):** Supported adding guidance for protocol developers to consider *applicable national laws* where rights have direct legal counterparts (e.g., data privacy), without detailing specific laws, as governments are duty-bound to uphold human rights.

*   **`draft-ietf-hrpc-freedom-of-association` Update:**
    *   Co-author Niels ten Oever stated the draft has addressed previous group feedback and is awaiting a document shepherd.
    *   The chair highlighted the draft's strong position after a significant overhaul, making it a straightforward task for a document shepherd, even for newcomers.
    *   The importance of this draft was reiterated, as freedom of association and assembly is explicitly mentioned in the HRPC charter.

*   **`draft-irtf-hrpc-feminism-protocols` Update:**
    *   Mallory Knodel presented an update on `draft-irtf-hrpc-feminism-protocols`, co-authored with Juliana Castro.
    *   **Goal:** Describe how internet standards and protocols impact diverse groups from an intersectional feminist perspective, drawing inspiration from RFC 8280.
    *   **History:** Work originated from a presentation on the Feminist Principles of the Internet (FPIs) at IETF 104, followed by initial draft versions exploring user-level impacts and internal IETF gender dynamics. Early focus was on seeking feedback from feminist communities.
    *   **Proposed New Direction:**
        *   Shift from focusing solely on FPIs to a broader literature review encompassing diverse works on feminism and technology.
        *   Reframe the audience towards the IETF, adopting a "guidelines-like" format similar to `draft-guidelines`, focusing on user-level impacts rather than extensive theoretical framing.
        *   Establish a clear research question: "How can intersectional feminism guide the development of internet standards protocols and their implementations?"
        *   Develop a literature review that includes storytelling and diverse sources (media, interviews, archives).
        *   Suggest future activities like invited talks, workshops, and interim meetings.
    *   **Group Discussion on Adoption:** The chair proposed formal adoption of the draft by HRPC to provide a clearer mandate and compel external communities to recognize the work's importance within the IETF. IRTF Chair Colin Perkins encouraged continuing the work and building community, stating that formal adoption could be addressed when useful.

## Decisions and Action Items

*   **`draft-irtf-hrpc-guidelines`:** Authors (Niels ten Oever, Gurshabad Grover) to digest review feedback, work on a new version, and engage the list for clarifications. Colin Perkins offered to engage directly with the authors for further discussion.
*   **`draft-ietf-hrpc-freedom-of-association`:** The group issued a call for a volunteer document shepherd.
*   **HRPC Co-chair Search:** IRTF Chair Colin Perkins will continue engaging with candidates, aiming to resolve the search before the next IETF meeting.

## Next Steps

*   **`draft-irtf-hrpc-guidelines`:** Revise the draft based on the detailed review feedback, focusing on providing more context for human rights, shifting the framing to design considerations, improving structure, acknowledging trade-offs, and suggesting concrete actions.
*   **`draft-ietf-hrpc-freedom-of-association`:** Secure a document shepherd to guide the draft through the review and publication process.
*   **`draft-irtf-hrpc-feminism-protocols`:** Authors will proceed with the proposed reframing, including a broader literature review, developing a clearer research question, focusing on user-level impacts, and incorporating diverse storytelling methods. The authors will continue to seek community engagement and discuss formal adoption by the HRPC.
*   **HRPC Engagement with IGF:** Explore avenues for collaboration, potentially through a dynamic coalition, bilateral discussions, or inviting IGF participants to HRPC activities to exchange insights on impact assessments and policy implications.