From: Carlos Pignataro <cpignata@gmail.com>
Message-Id: <720F83B0-919F-4EB6-9155-D63FA85BEC06@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
	boundary="Apple-Mail=_D25E3A62-72CB-4B82-80B3-0F0A45DFCB29";
	protocol="application/pgp-signature";
	micalg=pgp-sha256
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3826.700.81\))
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2025 19:15:17 -0400
In-Reply-To: <08C9EAA6-24F2-4286-8C57-3C810F1B2523@mnot.net>
To: Mark Nottingham <mnot=40mnot.net@dmarc.ietf.org>
References: <08C9EAA6-24F2-4286-8C57-3C810F1B2523@mnot.net>
Message-ID-Hash: NQVI3KJFK5C46CXANJ4DOQKFLJ22YPR5
CC: E-Impact IETF <e-impact@ietf.org>
Precedence: list
Subject: =?utf-8?q?=5BE-impact=5D_Re=3A_Moving_draft-various-eimpact-arch-considerati?=
	=?utf-8?q?ons_along?=
Archived-At: 
 <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/e-impact/sYN5iIf4sz0HbJzv1QeVNFCwjM8>


--Apple-Mail=_D25E3A62-72CB-4B82-80B3-0F0A45DFCB29
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="Apple-Mail=_393BA17B-E368-4684-9905-5B1498DDFED4"


--Apple-Mail=_393BA17B-E368-4684-9905-5B1498DDFED4
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8

Hello, Mark,

Welcome to the program! It looks like you joined about 4 months ago, but =
your email below is the first mention of I=E2=80=99ve seen
https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/eimpact/history/

Happy to share a perspective on your question =E2=80=94 I didn=E2=80=99t =
want to leave your email unanswered.

First, in general, and more so specifically here, I believe foremost the =
general IETF guidance applies =E2=80=94 see =
https://www.ietf.org/participate/roles/  :
"Document Editors [=E2=80=A6] Editors are appointed by the Chairs of the =
group, and it is preferred that the Chairs themselves not serve as =
document editors to ensure a distinction between the process of =
providing input to the document and the document text itself.=E2=80=9D
Given there are already two chairs, a third chair does not un-chair the =
other chairs ;-)

Second, the eimpact topic is nuanced and hurdled by multidisciplinary. =
Even what might seem innocuous (e.g., GHG vs. carbon vs. CO2-equivalent) =
can be significant. I=E2=80=99d prioritize editors who have done =
substantive (e.g., day job) work in both environmental sustainability =
and networking, or at least an editors=E2=80=99 team whose combined =
experience clearly covers both with enough overlap to collaborate =
effectively.

Third, may I ask about the benefit you see in appointing a new =
chair/shepherd =E2=80=9Cwho hasn=E2=80=99t been involved to date,=E2=80=9D=
 versus someone with program context? I don=E2=80=99t recall many cases =
where a chair without prior involvement is brought in to publish a =
document; how would that interact with the current chairs=E2=80=99 =
roles?

More broadly, I worry that relying on a small number of people =
=E2=80=9Cholding the pen=E2=80=9D will introduce implicit biases. It is =
not like the current pen-holders where openly chosen. Even with the best =
intentions, limited diversity of perspectives tends to reduce quality. =
Chairs manage meetings, set and prioritize agendas, guide direction, and =
edit and help shape text. Rotating those responsibilities only within a =
relatively small circle of chairs/editors/everything who know process =
and handshakes can concentrate influence.

Anyway, my =E2=82=AC0.017 =E2=80=94 hoping this helps you.

Best,

Carlos.

> On Sep 4, 2025, at 8:36=E2=80=AFPM, Mark Nottingham =
<mnot=3D40mnot.net@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
>=20
> Hello everyone,
>=20
> I've joined the program as an IAB member, with the purpose of getting =
the program output published:
>  =
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-various-eimpact-arch-considerations=
/
>=20
> One thing that needs to be settled before publication in the author =
list on the draft; RFC Editor policy is to have a maximum of five =
authors on a draft, and this far exceeds that.
>=20
> I'd like to propose a way to determine who should be authors on the =
draft, as someone who hasn't been involved to date. I haven't looked at =
the history yet, but thought I'd highlight how I would approach that =
decision.
>=20
> In general, I think that the authors list should reflect the people =
who are actively 'holding the pen' on the draft. If their role is =
primarily editorial, their name should have the 'ed.' qualifier to =
indicate that they're an editor. Then, people who have contributed to =
the content of the draft can be acknowledged in a 'contributors' section =
near the end.
>=20
> Please take a moment to consider this and indicate whether this =
approach is workable in this case; if there's some context that I'm =
missing that would be good to know.
>=20
> Cheers,
>=20
>=20
> --
> Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
>=20
> --=20
> E-impact mailing list -- e-impact@ietf.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to e-impact-leave@ietf.org


--Apple-Mail=_393BA17B-E368-4684-9905-5B1498DDFED4
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset=utf-8

<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"content-type" content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dutf-8"></head><body style=3D"overflow-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;">Hello, =
Mark,<div><br></div><div>Welcome to the program! It looks like you =
joined about 4 months ago, but your email below is the first mention of =
I=E2=80=99ve seen</div><div><a =
href=3D"https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/eimpact/history/">https://datat=
racker.ietf.org/group/eimpact/history/</a></div><div><br></div><div><div>H=
appy to share a perspective on your question =E2=80=94 I didn=E2=80=99t =
want to leave your email =
unanswered.</div></div><div><br></div><div><div>First, in general, and =
more so specifically here, I believe foremost the general IETF guidance =
applies =E2=80=94 see <a =
href=3D"https://www.ietf.org/participate/roles/">https://www.ietf.org/part=
icipate/roles/</a> &nbsp;:</div><div><div><i>"Document Editors [=E2=80=A6]=
 Editors are appointed by the Chairs of the group, and&nbsp;<b><u>it is =
preferred that the Chairs themselves not serve as document =
editors</u></b>&nbsp;to ensure a distinction between the process of =
providing input to the document and the document text =
itself.=E2=80=9D</i></div></div></div><div><p class=3D"p1">Given there =
are already two chairs, a third chair does not un-chair the other chairs =
;-)</p></div><div><div>Second, the eimpact topic is nuanced and hurdled =
by multidisciplinary. Even what might seem innocuous (e.g., GHG vs. =
carbon vs. CO2-equivalent) can be significant. I=E2=80=99d prioritize =
editors who have done substantive (e.g., day job) work in both =
environmental sustainability and networking, or at least an editors=E2=80=99=
 team whose combined experience clearly covers both with enough overlap =
to collaborate effectively.</div></div><div><br></div><div><div>Third, =
may I ask about the benefit you see in appointing a new chair/shepherd =
=E2=80=9Cwho hasn=E2=80=99t been involved to date,=E2=80=9D versus =
someone with program context? I don=E2=80=99t recall many cases where a =
chair without prior involvement is brought in to publish a document; how =
would that interact with the current chairs=E2=80=99 =
roles?</div></div><div><br></div><div><div>More broadly, I worry that =
relying on a small number of people =E2=80=9Cholding the pen=E2=80=9D =
will introduce implicit biases. It is not like the current pen-holders =
where openly chosen. Even with the best intentions, limited diversity of =
perspectives tends to reduce quality. Chairs manage meetings, set and =
prioritize agendas, guide direction, and edit and help shape text. =
Rotating those responsibilities only within a relatively small circle of =
chairs/editors/everything who know process and handshakes can =
concentrate influence.</div></div><div><br></div><div>Anyway, my =
=E2=82=AC0.017 =E2=80=94 hoping this helps =
you.</div><div><br></div><div>Best,</div><div><br></div><div>Carlos.</div>=
<div><div><br><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div>On Sep 4, 2025, at =
8:36=E2=80=AFPM, Mark Nottingham &lt;mnot=3D40mnot.net@dmarc.ietf.org&gt; =
wrote:</div><br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><div><div>Hello =
everyone,<br><br>I've joined the program as an IAB member, with the =
purpose of getting the program output published:<br> =
&nbsp;https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-various-eimpact-arch-consider=
ations/<br><br>One thing that needs to be settled before publication in =
the author list on the draft; RFC Editor policy is to have a maximum of =
five authors on a draft, and this far exceeds that.<br><br>I'd like to =
propose a way to determine who should be authors on the draft, as =
someone who hasn't been involved to date. I haven't looked at the =
history yet, but thought I'd highlight how I would approach that =
decision.<br><br>In general, I think that the authors list should =
reflect the people who are actively 'holding the pen' on the draft. If =
their role is primarily editorial, their name should have the 'ed.' =
qualifier to indicate that they're an editor. Then, people who have =
contributed to the content of the draft can be acknowledged in a =
'contributors' section near the end.<br><br>Please take a moment to =
consider this and indicate whether this approach is workable in this =
case; if there's some context that I'm missing that would be good to =
know.<br><br>Cheers,<br><br><br>--<br>Mark Nottingham =
&nbsp;&nbsp;https://www.mnot.net/<br><br>-- <br>E-impact mailing list -- =
e-impact@ietf.org<br>To unsubscribe send an email to =
e-impact-leave@ietf.org<br></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></body=
></html>=

--Apple-Mail=_393BA17B-E368-4684-9905-5B1498DDFED4--

--Apple-Mail=_D25E3A62-72CB-4B82-80B3-0F0A45DFCB29
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
	name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=V9bg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Apple-Mail=_D25E3A62-72CB-4B82-80B3-0F0A45DFCB29--