Re: [Ietf-and-github] Rules regarding ownership of orgs

Let's make sure we have a good chat with the Secretariat about 2FA and storing credentials, ok?

> On 18 Mar 2020, at 5:55 am, Warren Kumari <warren@kumari.net> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 10:22 AM Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Hi folks,
>> 
>> I think it's a mistake to overindex on trying to minimize the power of the secretariat here. Remember that these are just tools we use to develop our drafts and the secretariat *already* controls the tools we use to do our official work (the mailing list, drafts repo, data tracker). For that reason, I believe having them do this work as much as practical increases our overall efficiency without incurring undue risk.
> 
> On principle I avoid agreeing with Ekr -- but in this case he's
> completely right :-)  Anyone who believes that the IESG / ADs run
> anything is, sadly, mistaken - the secretariat is the actual power
> behind the throne, and ADs are largely figureheads (ok, not really,
> but fairly close) - the secretariat runs basically all of the tooling,
> and has access to everything - when an AD wants a document to enter
> IETF LC, they click a button which triggers the secretariat to
> actually *do* $magic. When an AD wants a document to show up on the
> telechat, they click a button - and it's the secretariat who actually
> schedules it. After balloting, it's the AD who says "Great, approved"
> - and then the secretariat who says "I think you mean *after* the
> DISCUSSes are cleared, right? Right?!". I think that having Org owned
> by the secretariat, and having them add and remove ADs as people roll
> in and out makes much more sense than having ADs own anything. Alexey
> is finishing his term, and will be replated - having the secretariat
> handle this seems like a much better solution than having the ADs swap
> people in and out...
> 
> W
> 
>> 
>> -Ekr
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 9:21 PM Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Mar 17, 2020, at 01:04, Salz, Rich wrote:
>>>> In the cases I'm familiar with, we have 2+ AD's and 2 WG chairs.  I
>>>> think that's enough redundancy.
>>> 
>>> I agree.  Though I think that if we are to set a hard limit, then it should be 2, not more.  Obviously, with the number of potential owners, we could have more.  Here is where I'm at right now:
>>> 
>>>> GitHub requires that each organization have at least one owner.  The owners for a Working Group repository MUST include responsible Area Directors and SHOULD include Area Directors from the area and the IETF Secretariat.  Area Directors MAY also designate a delegate that becomes an owner. Working Group chairs MAY also be owners.  An organization MUST have at least 2 owners.
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ietf-and-github mailing list
>>> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ietf-and-github mailing list
>> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
> idea in the first place.
> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing
> regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
> of pants.
>   ---maf
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-and-github mailing list
> Ietf-and-github@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/