Re: [Iasa20] Call for volunteers: IASA 2.0 design team

Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in> Tue, 09 May 2017 22:50 UTC

Return-Path: <alissa@cooperw.in>
X-Original-To: iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CDB212EB7F for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 May 2017 15:50:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.72
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cooperw.in header.b=QbYzysAg; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=GEYi61c0
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 QTLbk6bKxv-x for <iasa20@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 May 2017 15:50:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com (out4-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.28]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2A8EC12EB7E for <iasa20@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 May 2017 15:50:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9447E20AB6; Tue, 9 May 2017 18:50:22 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 09 May 2017 18:50:22 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h=cc :content-type:date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=GYfxVDCCWMPXtqMpPcES9So5YKYYnXulWbALJ+YNb h4=; b=QbYzysAgqdE4I/e3HAXFWtQc1PXYICB4Q/Jo7hvNuyIcVIc+DY9q/s1hi vZBQMnow81XYY1QSAIjHKErJV+Bqet/RoNHHUJrxdBiOUucVTVqxWne93mMkJHMJ bWd1/gOdV1jmisUCXVgMxlW9v6PZkS+O8dLdn5PZXCebHVFvEckTB2XQ2BsNZeEg aP2D0JUafpZT7UztyzQvkZxH022jmmv27POCnStNQUdSyzZbQwmL+LFGzGM1qy4z lkJXxIo/L8clGbPZeatcTcRXFHwHbcMpVtZOxwAn2coXeEKHLNeC1k5HCDa/OBKe 31VMjsk3nzVSCWtUTVnIkg9bR3QOQ==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=GYfxVDCCWMPXtqMpPc ES9So5YKYYnXulWbALJ+YNbh4=; b=GEYi61c0NVu3L8oCJsKnKxCfbwxji1Irrw QR+6srqonuJnkod6JvdxYXsK23RWEvOUeSFsqGdPANtJ7lnReLLY+/9Pt/vf3MN0 XYeaeLWgfhPs233H2U9EeTqjjpuvwWihQfdfCgp0m2aocT1+l+9FN5YxeTyo88rM Pny5UvUudS2q0Mcx/7Kxum58aEJ9cfv/9bC6devxy+U/tU2ysXlfzNikz+d4FKUu YcHbN+1PBw5dWDPSXvrqm299TK4ApckWgt/UuGwM+YZ99CpoZep00YXYbcDXssvv C0aG9lrcECUjppuxvAatcmbHMlZDSC7PnigVr8cbg/b6BGFfPMzA==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:rkcSWQOV0N--cKRFf5_8k0b3p_lKTVcZpy4AjSt9b6PjP-Zl-yjbHQ>
X-Sasl-enc: 1BSEstRHXcpizloRnysmZUe/SaQoj8QS8Y4BlVzxAoTG 1494370222
Received: from [10.24.41.93] (unknown [128.107.241.167]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E84377E9E6; Tue, 9 May 2017 18:50:21 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_2BAD0A5E-FD80-4EDE-801A-7BAD1FD3B5F2"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\))
From: Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in>
In-Reply-To: <CA+9kkMBiB4v9aAdy6_C+YqhDp-gCJwxCkqTvKWL2MWrYtkGH=Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 09 May 2017 15:50:20 -0700
Cc: iasa20@ietf.org
Message-Id: <64B42F59-586B-4A03-BA87-23BB01C1A021@cooperw.in>
References: <76E736E8-E7F5-45D4-ABA3-3E1766450865@cooperw.in> <CA+9kkMBiB4v9aAdy6_C+YqhDp-gCJwxCkqTvKWL2MWrYtkGH=Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/iasa20/me4bdgJaGJKDU70fFHMAQdb3jCI>
Subject: Re: [Iasa20] Call for volunteers: IASA 2.0 design team
X-BeenThere: iasa20@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions relating to reorganising the IETF administrative structures in the so called “IASA 2.0” project. <iasa20.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/iasa20>, <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/iasa20/>
List-Post: <mailto:iasa20@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20>, <mailto:iasa20-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 May 2017 22:50:28 -0000

Hi Ted,

Good questions. For a topic like this, I believe it’s premature to charter a working group. The problem list is well defined, but the space of considerations and solutions related to solving those problems is both very wide and potentially includes a number of topics that are outside the scope of your typical IETF working group (e.g., budget, personnel, legal issues). I’d like the design team to spend some time taking all of this under consideration as a means to help structure the next step of the community discussion around a focused approach/solution set. 

That next step might be writing a WG charter. Or it might be more plenary community discussion, or processing a document or two as AD-sponsored, or following some other process. My understanding is that IASA itself was created without a WG being formed, so while in my head it seems like a WG might be useful here down the line, I don’t want to presume at this point that that is the only option.

Also, I’m a big fan of tightly focused WG charters, and I think we need this interim step if we do want to be able to write one, including being able to define precisely what the work of a potential WG would be covering and what its deliverables would be.

The use of a design team was included in Jari’s original project plan, and I agree with him that it’s a useful tool. https://www.ietf.org/blog/2016/11/proposed-project-ietf-administrative-support-2-0/ <https://www.ietf.org/blog/2016/11/proposed-project-ietf-administrative-support-2-0/>
> On May 9, 2017, at 2:53 PM, Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Howdy,
> 
> On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 1:56 PM, Alissa Cooper <alissa@cooperw.in <mailto:alissa@cooperw.in>> wrote:
> I think the community is at a point in the IASA 2.0 discussions where we are ready to form a design team to start evaluating options for the path forward. We have a good articulation of the set of problems we are facing in draft-hall-iasa20-workshops-report and draft-daigle-iasa-retrospective. We have some sense of the outcome properties that people are looking for here, based on list discussion. So I'd like to task a design team to go examine potential solutions to the problem set that fit the outcome properties, and come back to the community with recommended solutions.
> 
> So, I find it somewhat surprising that we are the "form a design team" phase, as I would have assumed that the next phase was "charter a working group".  You have an active mailing list, a couple of good -00 drafts, and a problem to solve.  Writing a charter and going to the community with the plan and timelines and getting confirmation seems like the next step.
> 
> Refreshing my memory with the minutes of the meeting:
> 
> https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/98/minutes/minutes-98-iasa20-00.txt <https://www.ietf.org/proceedings/98/minutes/minutes-98-iasa20-00.txt>
> 
> There was no charter discussed and no workplan set out.
>  
> The scope of the solutions to be explored would include:
> 
> - Structural and organizational changes, both externally (with ISOC and contractors) and internally (within the IAOC and subcommittees)
> - Changes to personnel resources, both volunteer and paid
> - Transparency changes
> 
> For now, changes to the funding model would be out of scope to the extent they fall outside the categories above, although the design team's work should be informed by the prior discussion of funding challenges. The IAOC sponsorship committee is currently in the process of getting off the ground and I think it would make sense to have some of that discussion start there before merging it back in with the administrative discussion. And I think the administrative problems are articulated well enough for a team to get going with that focus.
>  
> My hope is that the design team would have something (even an interim something) ready for community discussion around the time frame of IETF 99. From there we can figure out what a logical next step would be.
> 
> Perhaps I'm totally misunderstanding this.  Is this design team is preparing a 2nd BoF or a charter for consideration at IETF 99? If so, I am very supportive.
> 
> If the design team, to be picked by the middle of next week, is to be working on proposals for substantive changes to the IETF structure based on where the IASA conversations are right now, I think you have to define how the community consideration of those will take place.  A plenary discussion at IETF 99 will take us from 77 people at the last IASA 2.0 meeting to a room of many hundreds; more structure than that seems to me necessary.
> 
> If you’re interested in volunteering and willing to dedicate time to this work over the next several months, please send me email off-list by May 17, 2017 and I’ll sort out the team composition.
> 
> 
> When do you intend to make the design team membership public?

I feel like this is a trick question. :-) I would want to announce the membership as soon as it is settled, hopefully not very long after May 17.

Best,
Alissa

> 
> regards,
> 
> Ted
> 
>  
> Thanks,
> Alissa
> _______________________________________________
> iasa20 mailing list
> iasa20@ietf.org <mailto:iasa20@ietf.org>
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20 <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20>
>