Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatch (gendispatch)
Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Tue, 08 October 2019 19:18 UTC
Return-Path: <barryleiba@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A61A11200B9; Tue, 8 Oct 2019 12:18:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.478
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.478 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.172, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eQgQT7YlYxjM; Tue, 8 Oct 2019 12:18:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-io1-f53.google.com (mail-io1-f53.google.com [209.85.166.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46F021200D6; Tue, 8 Oct 2019 12:18:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-io1-f53.google.com with SMTP id w12so38938191iol.11; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 12:18:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=gZcVtY+KlWoimrd2uTVTyYDF/DcEa775yKVJpqws6dw=; b=MUgn/T5KYlUaPQMkOsbHuJ8pFEmTJSnqs+Up3Xx5xi1lc/vcCJHUEtYA1XssfdHEWS /+SseIoXha9t/ykFzP0NsGOGdWmDGAJKnbMGhL6hHJdcT7aHBK5iE6N46SAPFITWrHs/ wt4FsiXWMD06kcMQWyOqJ3b7wth7+wIvFHf/tF6mdPbBzc/eslDAzpKIR6f/HuVYr/uq wsEawgmvo4NJlrkjZDLb3z0lpqztJ7skSohNIWP1irVMlZYj25MAJzPIbFtw5Oi6t7yS uiEaeOOw7YYmxl44lnCg+ocfMXeRlqLcqXXWWWOoAf3lpqXi1d5GFuQMl04brKf8MBuE /aag==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUYevZ8NHeqEl0z1eQkVgfW/BoqIVi8B7KPT5+m46VWz5DItmQ2 2ou3kmMuQCkPSF+DTb9Q6Vie4AL0b/GkKVAr8GCms+UcJlo=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzxuWZiVsD0+A0lJz9+7uPJv9vLQgfe673Ec7OdSYU28fGGDfc/jlYwT/9iuqSmtMt+A8lsnUxMYi1/3adcXQs=
X-Received: by 2002:a02:a15b:: with SMTP id m27mr5498266jah.59.1570562310064; Tue, 08 Oct 2019 12:18:30 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <156953786511.31837.12069537821662045851.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <8A15D8AF-6B1A-42A0-85CE-DF861E73C1C2@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <8A15D8AF-6B1A-42A0-85CE-DF861E73C1C2@nostrum.com>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2019 21:18:18 +0200
Message-ID: <CALaySJL0-=Jn0Wk8GR+xrGcZ6Vyv4QO+p=LgkKt5srdVu+Zh_g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
Cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, gendispatch@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gendispatch/3T5fkf7n2N_TaCjPQuSsEdzO4hk>
Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatch (gendispatch)
X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: General Area Dispatch <gendispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gendispatch>, <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/gendispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:gendispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gendispatch>, <mailto:gendispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2019 19:18:35 -0000
> At the risk of strawman-ing: If the problem is mainly that GEN issues > tend to eat the IESG list, then a separate mailing list could be > enough. Maybe the idea is mainly to have chairs responsible for > discussion wrangling? If so, then a more conventional “GenArea” working > group might do the trick. I don't think it's that they "eat the IESG list" so much as that they "eat the IETF list". And not in the sense that they monopolize the list, but that that particular list isn't sufficiently focused to give process issues proper consideration and determine what the right way to handle them is. From my PoV, the advantage of a DISPATCH-like group, rather than an unfocused area group, is that the former is assigned the task of considering what's being discussed/proposed and figuring out how best to address it... rather than to just keep discussing it to no conclusion. > Another difference is that while DISPATCH is mainly interesting to > people in the ART Area, we can expect GENDISPATCH to draw from all > areas. We try not to let DISPATCH conflict with other ART meetings. How > do you deconflict GENDISPATCH without it turning into another plenary > or a standing BoF? This is always an issue with Gen Area BoFs and WGs, and this will be no different. I think the bottom line is that there'll be a set of people who will want to participate regularly, and we'll try to accommodate that... there'll be people who want to parachute in for certain topics, and we'll do what we can to accommodate that, realizing that it's harder... and there'll be a lot of people who won't want to have anything to do with it until a proposal is at a stage where they strongly support it or object to it, and there's little we can do to accommodate that. It is what it is, but it's no different than if we just charter Gen Area WGs without a DISPATCH-like start. No? Barry
- [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatch (g… The IESG
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Alissa Cooper
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Sean Turner
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Sean Turner
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Alissa Cooper
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Alissa Cooper
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Roni Even (A)
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Alissa Cooper
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Roni Even (A)
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Ben Campbell
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Barry Leiba
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Ben Campbell
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Mark Nottingham
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Ben Campbell
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… John C Klensin
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Ben Campbell
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Ben Campbell
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Alissa Cooper
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Alissa Cooper
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… John C Klensin
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Ben Campbell
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Ben Campbell
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Jari Arkko
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Patrick McManus
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Michael Richardson
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Alissa Cooper
- Re: [Gendispatch] WG Review: General Area Dispatc… Spencer Dawkins at IETF