Re: [Gendispatch] FW: New Version Notification for draft-rsalz-less-ad-work-00.txt
"Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com> Thu, 27 July 2023 07:17 UTC
Return-Path: <rsalz@akamai.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 AD386C151AF7 for <gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Jul 2023 00:17:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.805
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.805 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=akamai.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aI-DinGKLZaI for <gendispatch@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Jul 2023 00:17:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com (mx0b-00190b01.pphosted.com [IPv6:2620:100:9005:57f::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14CBDC151AF5 for <gendispatch@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Jul 2023 00:17:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0050102.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by m0050102.ppops.net-00190b01. (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 36R1Nu9D017103; Thu, 27 Jul 2023 08:17:23 +0100
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=akamai.com; h=from : to : cc : subject : date : message-id : references : in-reply-to : content-type : mime-version; s=jan2016.eng; bh=UzenI2K8N2cCnzJMkZgR3jH1rubC92YS8NtuPMIaNR4=; b=W3CJRVlwDvRT7L25wy3Zz6LtA7CgYBlDc7gegPpmbIfBG1BIGrWZxg+slGFs7hs3hVTu fgBW8fs4dl02J84OybyKg/fKXEL0/hKifq4Au084P3CmsCqAq3rxawm+3eVfr77Wt+Rp ZDBw7b9+Z4csua11PzpFHysjraYOSYj1p+y6gvrmM3KopKpTC2rI+qK+eQEbre2X4wDM WcZ2bLytEB6tuoXW1KFpqU1cf7mynH9Z8efNpiTKxgkr8lWb1MiDcFInUf2x/v1w7ppf PeaT5v9Gfj4iV0zgPVorzWuJG3rzB2BDtJj98h3BCPf0N1QjOTzaFi42p0PG1eiqe6bE nw==
Received: from prod-mail-ppoint4 (a72-247-45-32.deploy.static.akamaitechnologies.com [72.247.45.32] (may be forged)) by m0050102.ppops.net-00190b01. (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3s046kgd8t-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 27 Jul 2023 08:17:22 +0100
Received: from pps.filterd (prod-mail-ppoint4.akamai.com [127.0.0.1]) by prod-mail-ppoint4.akamai.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 36R6u8A8032140; Thu, 27 Jul 2023 03:17:21 -0400
Received: from email.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.50.203]) by prod-mail-ppoint4.akamai.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3s0aewdvj3-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 27 Jul 2023 03:17:21 -0400
Received: from ustx2ex-dag4mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.50.203) by ustx2ex-dag4mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com (172.27.50.203) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1258.12; Thu, 27 Jul 2023 00:17:13 -0700
Received: from ustx2ex-dag4mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.50.203]) by ustx2ex-dag4mb4.msg.corp.akamai.com ([172.27.50.203]) with mapi id 15.02.1258.012; Thu, 27 Jul 2023 00:17:13 -0700
From: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>
To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
CC: "gendispatch@ietf.org" <gendispatch@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Gendispatch] FW: New Version Notification for draft-rsalz-less-ad-work-00.txt
Thread-Index: AQHZpRaqOFxOHkzSJEO6boldgk3rwq+W48UAgDTZeoCAAd+WgA==
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2023 07:17:13 +0000
Message-ID: <C32A544E-6FC9-422A-BC89-1EAEF5EB28AF@akamai.com>
References: <168744432974.12836.15546856939515664242@ietfa.amsl.com> <AB2CDCEA-1A18-40BB-82A8-BCFD66EBB0CB@akamai.com> <CABcZeBO0gtE0Dd3_F=EciRXaZgFdyMiyfKKZ++YK8ZVCJLQDoQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABcZeBO0gtE0Dd3_F=EciRXaZgFdyMiyfKKZ++YK8ZVCJLQDoQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/16.75.23070901
x-originating-ip: [172.27.164.43]
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_C32A544E6FC9422ABC891EAEF5EB28AFakamaicom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.254,Aquarius:18.0.957,Hydra:6.0.591,FMLib:17.11.176.26 definitions=2023-07-26_08,2023-07-26_01,2023-05-22_02
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 phishscore=0 mlxscore=0 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxlogscore=999 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2306200000 definitions=main-2307270064
X-Proofpoint-GUID: TNbgZarWDOCx_SNvrLqBFq3GElru7ARn
X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: TNbgZarWDOCx_SNvrLqBFq3GElru7ARn
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.254,Aquarius:18.0.957,Hydra:6.0.591,FMLib:17.11.176.26 definitions=2023-07-26_08,2023-07-26_01,2023-05-22_02
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 adultscore=0 clxscore=1015 priorityscore=1501 bulkscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 impostorscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2306200000 definitions=main-2307270064
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gendispatch/whnIvcaCWhgIooieEB4gR2SB8tY>
Subject: Re: [Gendispatch] FW: New Version Notification for draft-rsalz-less-ad-work-00.txt
X-BeenThere: gendispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Thu, 27 Jul 2023 07:17:27 -0000
You present an array of different proposed solutions, Which is what I was told to do after 116[1]: “Dispatch: More concrete proposals are needed before moving forwards. Refine, and propose some solutions, before coming back for more community discussion, which could take the form of a BoF.” My slides from that presentation are at [2] I would instead start with the diagnosis of what consumes time. When he was an AD, Adrian he asked fellow IESG members to do that. It went nowhere. While I didn't keep detailed records of my time allocation for when I was AD Then we don’t have data, but rather anec-data. If getting data is a requirement for being able to move this forward, how does the community feel we should get that data? My sense is that 5.2 (no "revisit" douments) and 5.4 (content not language) are not really that big contributors to IESG load. We don’t know, of course, and while your sense is better than mine (as you were an AD), it’s still just guessing based on your years-old time estimates. Which is why we asked for a WG so that we could propose experiments and see the effect. This is exacerbated by the fact the AD for area A isn't substitutable for the AD for area B, so it's not like you can just have a panel of ADs drawn out of the IESG (as US appeals courts do). Moreover, a number of areas actually have internal divisions of labor, so, for instance, if SEC has one AD that has a COMSEC background and the other with an OPSEC background, those expertises aren't substitutable. Note that the draft says “one AD per area” and leaves the decision up to the ADs. This comment is therefore a bit of a nonsequitor. [0] Though IMO the vibe that it's so hard that it takes two years to find your feet is a bit over the top. Then IESG members need to stop saying this, because they are the only ones saying it, and it gets said a lot. Almost every incumbent IESG candidate said it to NomCom, offered as a rationale for their reselection. I re-read the minutes of today’s meeting and the majority of people who spoke were in favor of a WG or a BOF and “do nothing” was definitely in the rough. But the outcome doesn’t reflect that. So chairs, I am asking for clarification of what you think the consensus for next steps were. [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/minutes-116-gendispatch-202303290400/ [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/117/materials/slides-117-gendispatch-making-less-work-for-area-directors-draft-rsalz-less-ad-work-00
- [Gendispatch] FW: New Version Notification for dr… Salz, Rich
- Re: [Gendispatch] New Version Notification for dr… Greg Skinner
- Re: [Gendispatch] New Version Notification for dr… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Gendispatch] FW: New Version Notification fo… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Gendispatch] FW: New Version Notification fo… Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Gendispatch] FW: New Version Notification fo… Salz, Rich
- Re: [Gendispatch] FW: New Version Notification fo… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Gendispatch] FW: New Version Notification fo… Salz, Rich
- Re: [Gendispatch] FW: New Version Notification fo… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Gendispatch] FW: New Version Notification fo… Salz, Rich
- Re: [Gendispatch] FW: New Version Notification fo… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Gendispatch] FW: New Version Notification fo… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Gendispatch] FW: New Version Notification fo… Rob Sayre
- Re: [Gendispatch] FW: New Version Notification fo… Adrian Farrel