Re: [Add] Proposed charter and BoF request for IETF 106

If the proposal was half baked due to hurry, maybe the right approach is to wait until March. If you really think it’s urgent, you could do it as a virtual BoF in January.  That’s what the IESG would say to me if I proposed something that was too rushed.  

Are you going easier on yourselves than you would on an outsider?  What is the rush?  Is there some goal that you are pushing to achieve that justifies this rush?

At present, the charter does not even discuss some of the most important use cases for dns services configured by the network operator, particularly the ones that involve surveillance. And we’ve had endless discussions on the exact topic of the proposed BoF here on the ADD mailing list with no evidence of consensus on the topics in the proposed charter. 

With that in mind, why does the IESG consider this a good use of meeting time? We already had this BoF in Montreal. We know there is no consensus on these topics. Can you make brief, crisp elevator pitch on why this is worth the IETF’s time?

> On Oct 9, 2019, at 09:31, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> wrote:
> 
> 
>> 
>> Who wrote the charter? Shouldn’t the BoF proponents be 1-3 individuals, rather than a mailing list?
> 
> That's a fair question.  The answers are:
> 
> - The IESG write the charter proposal as something to float to the community.
> 
> - We took longer than we would have liked to get it done, and we
> wanted to be sure we had it ready for discussion as soon as possible,
> and to be sure we had a reasonable placeholder for BoF approval
> (today).  That was sloppy, and I'm sorry for that, but we also did not
> have time to get it socialized and to have people signed up as
> proponents and possible chairs yet.
> 
> So if it helps, consider "the IESG" as the charter proposal writers
> and "5 or 6 ADs" as the BoF proponents.
> 
> Barry
> 
>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 10:55 AM Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 2:39 PM Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I realize that the charter proposal isn't going to please everyone
>>> (and perhaps will please no one), but it's something that, at a first
>>> level of review, the IESG accepts and will likely want to move forward
>>> with.
>> 
>> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> Who wrote the charter? Shouldn’t the BoF proponents be 1-3 individuals, rather than a mailing list?
>> 
>> The proposed charter looks extremely misguided to me. But a proposal that no one will put their name on doesn’t even deserve an argument.
>> 
>> thanks,
>> Rob
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Add mailing list
> Add@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/add