[CFRG] CFRG does standards and that is a general problem. Was Re: OCB does not have an OID specified, that is a general problem

[Michael StJohns <[e-mail]>]

On 6/7/2021 9:53 AM, Roman Danyliw wrote:
>
>   * I would like to propose that in future assignment of relevant OIDs
>     and JOSE identifiers be considered a requirement for similar work.
>     If a spec for a symmetric mode isn't sufficiently specified to
>     enable interoperable implementation in CMS and JOSE, it is not
>     sufficiently specified to be an RFC.
>
> That’s a reasonable thing to ask for, and something that could be 
> caught by SECDIR or AD review.
>
> [Roman] Agreed in the general case for the IETF stream.  For RFC7253, 
> this review would have been during IESG conflict review because that 
> document was IRTF stream (which doesn’t have an SECDIR review, AD 
> review or even an IESG ballot).
>
> Roman
>
This seems to be yet another reason why the CFRG should be a WG and not 
an RG.

I know this is not a popular opinion, but I think by keeping the CFRG in 
the IRTF, we're actually hurting the IRTF.   In the deep murky history 
of the IRTF, the organization was originally (post Kobe) meant to be a 
place for exploration of a lot of different points of view.  The concept 
of a RG "adopting a draft" was pretty much anathema - the idea was for 
lots of competing ideas to make it through the publication filters after 
some peer review and thence on to the broader community for 
consideration within the protocol development community.   It was not to 
come to a "consensus" on the one true way.  It should be possible to go 
into a RG with an idea that meets the general theme and is at least 
plausible, without having to "win" a race of competing proposals, and 
come out of it with an RFC in much less than 2 years - even as an 
individual contributor.  I'm not sure that's still possible.

At this point, the IRTF is looking more and more like a more closed 
version of the IETF with many procedures mostly indistinguishable from 
the IETF.  A number of RGs even have IANA actions for their documents 
and that suggests standards creation is bleeding into the IRTF in a way 
that will diminish the worth of the IRTF as a place for ideas rather 
than finished designs.

In the instant discussion, OID assignment should be done using IETF 
procedures.  And discussions on changes to IETF procedures are (or 
should be?) probably out of scope for an RG.


Later, Mike