Re: [I18ndir] Getting restarted and triage

"Marc Blanchet" <> Fri, 14 June 2019 21:41 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 559D712009E for <>; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 14:41:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5g0iQ8S22Avq for <>; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 14:41:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::72f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CCB53120047 for <>; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 14:41:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id c11so2636212qkk.8 for <>; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 14:41:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20150623; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=sRbhzQ6/cGV4ynTd9z16MZ33EnpCu3+RSJ9HugrCxVs=; b=UQyemK1oVmF3r71PLZkuKUYnOPzCjRnq4Puu4LojeetVgxGQ9PgXe/BKoenLmybHVX MtAIw1PnOoywHuJTTuU3ctpT0VtdSuuD2YMTpfi0HYdeLY3mI4NOqjVz0k2hq3H1R2YZ k7QTVJvzld/YBFpwAxjdkFr/6eWWZw27ZIqf1nfiFT4c7j0BvdqU8n+CFVr1M19JpzPw NGNjNjfThoDC0Gvu+rLS7gGJcvbkTK7j+AZ5FKWzX+FvB6J+cakZO0VUlgyNQ56UIqyE lXjaI4Yez3b0ELT95T/ct0vEgp+91YbfQOAvpkS/SKNeAX4gBLb6KUFBlvk51Tkc23ka G/Dg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=sRbhzQ6/cGV4ynTd9z16MZ33EnpCu3+RSJ9HugrCxVs=; b=KPS7mTwBt8Kqp77vRQwZT66z986LBZhWn8Iroa5IIlJWrdKCdh7gaxvwVb+u8bPJCl mhFlzZlv2XfBDvNHdW6GIs+PhtonqJBu9FMfjhi5r/GYmvnh5O3v/abdIno/WdACnpgx 5rtFPP8QdIfiZ8MT7Hv/JOsxm5R/Y79MLpKRmq3fm4obMcfA9EHpICKSIG/lR75l44we u8tVd5gGCXIAqF/mHAodSgDwAV3wRrzcCkl5Qjjg1URjRqCUs7edNMa3bp4Hy7H8/Ca3 jxb1PGQZX6VWgA/hnBVeQHDnG8A4P4hto/mHWMX+n2nna2PxUOzQE6flt8uoouI8CrcT s68A==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVkaAiXMpE6TN6cH7kADw/21KUj8a5Z9CfXr9ZcXC81QISxM2EF /El8LYm5n5j3NuIlavH/Tjjr5g==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw6IbblV6PWXAedgxEp7G8xN2ML2hygVZXO7rTKDJ//Evb1i9ua/yHiwGFpGmfKDjU+oEMxgQ==
X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:13f9:: with SMTP id h25mr75904565qkl.283.1560548508952; Fri, 14 Jun 2019 14:41:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [] ( []) by with ESMTPSA id k55sm3403924qtf.68.2019. (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 14 Jun 2019 14:41:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Marc Blanchet" <>
To: "Patrik =?utf-8?b?RsOkbHRzdHLDtm0=?=" <>
Cc: "John C Klensin" <>, "Peter Saint-Andre" <>, "Pete Resnick" <>,
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 17:41:42 -0400
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.12.5r5635)
Message-ID: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <843EAB4535391A494DA216CC@PSB> <> <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_MailMate_503B8B8B-9610-4B63-BD5F-5198FDDF55AF_="
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [I18ndir] Getting restarted and triage
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internationalization Directorate <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 21:41:52 -0000

On 14 Jun 2019, at 17:37, Patrik Fältström wrote:

> On 14 Jun 2019, at 14:18, Marc Blanchet wrote:
>> your description of the drafts seems to show that these are enough 
>> substantive that it requires a WG.
> Friends,
> In general I would agree with you Marc, as one would really like to 
> have "a large bunch of people" that discusses these kind of things. In 
> the IETF such "a large bunch of people" is called "a wg".
> The sad thing, explained in Johns note, does not exist. However much 
> we would like it.
> Yes, I also would like to have a wg. Per issue. With tons of 
> specialist experts. We just do not have them.
> So, given that does not exist, we just have to face the fact that we 
> know who the people are, on an individual level, that do have at least 
> some clue, some time, and some interest to discuss these things. Lets 
> call that "a small group of known people".
> In the IETF, we call "a small group of known people" "a directorate".
> Why do I explain this? Well, this because on 30.000 feet level, 
> although the processes have been refined and specified and what not in 
> the IETF, ultimately there is an internet-draft, it is sent to the 
> IETF for last call, the IESG look at the feedback during last call and 
> make a determination.
> Our job, as "a small group of known people" is to help the shepherd 
> IESG member to create whatever document needed, that suggest whatever 
> we think is to be done, that will go on last call and not only pass, 
> but more importantly "say the right thing".
> Because we are here to do good shit!
> That we would like to have a wg as a tool to create that, sure, I 
> would like to have that as well. Just like a pony ;-)
> To conclude, yes Marc, I agree with you,

I know the history, been involved… I was more responding to the fact 
that from the IETF process perspective, when something of that 
substantive nature, IESG had usually highly preferred to run this 
through a wg than anything else. And I know at least one past AD here 
that was very pushy in _not_ doing AD-sponsored drafts. Having said 
that, any way is fine by me.


> but I think we just have to face the fact we can never have an 
> effective wg, and the best we can do regarding transparency, creation 
> of documents when needed and produce good results that IESG can use in 
> their determination is to have a good directorate.
>    Patrik