Advice for WG chairs dealing with off-topic postings

[IESG Secretary <[e-mail]>]

Managing off-topic postings to IETF Working Group (WG) mail lists is
challenging. Off-topic posts don't always disrupt the business of the
WG but they can start to, and judgement is required to determine when
the disruption is enough to rule a discussion off-topic. This advice
is particularly relevant when the WG Chair is considering using
measures like suspending posting rights from the WG mail list.

Discussions may be off-topic due to the limited scope of WG charters.
However, it is common practice to have discussions of expanding the
scope (and charter) of a WG on that WG mail list. Also, when people
have alternate proposals that do not fit within the scope of the WG but
that touch on the subject matter of the WG, it is common to inform the
participants of the WG. The ability to build consensus for alternate
proposals--even proposals outside the current scope of a WG--is
critical to the overall process. This must be balanced against
avoiding disruptions to the WG.

In addition to ruling discussions out of scope based on the WG charter,
a WG Chair may also rule a discussion off-topic if it is an in-scope
issue that has been resolved already by WG consensus. Of course, WG
Chairs need to balance discussion management against the need to re-
open a discussion if new information is provided. Technical problems
are often best addressed as soon as new information arises.

A WG Chair can schedule discussions such that a manageable set of
topics are being discussed at one time. This may result in a WG Chair
ruling a discussion to be off-topic for a limited time; at some point
before the WG finishes the related document, the discussion becomes
once again on-topic.

A difficult situation can arise when an alternate proposal is in-scope
but off-topic because the proposal is not mature enough for consensus
to be reached to adopt it. Some limited early discussion of the
proposal may be useful even before the proposal is written in the form
of an Internet-Draft; this helps the WG to gauge initial interest and
clarify what parts of the proposal require additional detail in order
for it to be evaluated. Prolonged discussion may get bogged down into
competing assumptions made in the absence of details in the proposal.
Thus, a WG Chair may allow initial discussion but then rule further
discussion off-topic until the proposal has been made in the form of an
Internet-Draft.

When a WG Chair rules a discussion off-topic, a message posted to the
WG mail list specifically on that ruling can help clarity and
transparency. Such a posting should usually be about the topic and the
ruling, not about any one participant or past posting. In announcing
the off-topic ruling the WG Chair should explain why the topic is out
of scope and when or where future discussion of the topic may take
place. WG Chairs should also point out that the IETF Last Call provides
an opportunity to make sure that important concerns have not been
misunderstood and that if a participant wishes to explain a concern to
the IETF they may do so at that time. These steps should reduce the
likelihood that participants who disagree with the scope or direction
of the overall WG will disrupt the WG discussions.

If the WG Chair is unsure where to direct discussion they can always
ask their Area Director or the IESG for help. Sometimes the right
answer may be for the participant to create a mail list where
interested parties can flesh out details and confirm that there is
sufficient interest to take up the WG's time.

_______________________________________________
IETF-Announce mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce