Re: [ietf-nomcom] Experiment in "full transparency"

["Salz, Rich" <[e-mail]>]

Kathleen,

I apologize if I embarrassed you in any way.

On 10/17/17, 11:00 AM, "Kathleen Moriarty" <[e-mail]> wrote:

    Hello,
    
    Since Rich's submission includes comments from our private
    conversation, I'll rehash the conversation to clarify my the points I
    made with some (not all) background on my thinking.
    
    I had asked Rich what he was interested to do as AD.  He responded
    that he would close down I2NSF first.  As responsible AD for that WG,
    I was surprised and tried to explain the value of the work as it
    probably wasn't an area of expertise for him.  As such, my response
    started off with something along the lines of customers brought that
    work into the IETF and we rarely get customers with a problem coming.
    Then I explained the value of the work that is coming from the group
    with an example of a draft that was adopted shortly after we spoke.
    The draft automates provisioning of IPsec sessions within a hosted
    service provider environment.  Many similar drafts will follow to
    remotely provision security services.
    
    Side note: having been a CISO and been responsible for enterprise
    security, being able to provision your security infrastructure and
    deploy security controls for your hosted environments will be a big
    step forward for many. The enterprises ability to generate reports on
    their security controls will help for their internal security
    assessments as well as internal/external audits. I would hope any new
    AD would take the time to understand work they may be managing before
    making decisions to close it down.  Maybe he would do that, but it
    might be a question to dig into more.
    
    Then I explained that with new work comes new people to the IETF.  In
    the case of I2NSF, they are engaging in multiple WGs and that's a
    really positive thing.  Having customers engaged early in the process
    will only improve the outcome.  Then I went into numbers and
    apparently, that's what stuck in Rich's mind and not that I see the
    work of I2NSF as valuable.  With 10 new people for a WG across 130
    some odd WGs, we have over 1000 active people contributing to the
    IETF.  It does bring in new people as as work closes down, others
    leave.
    
    IMO, it's great that some people engaging in new WGs understand the
    IETF way and begin to contribute in other WGs, review work of others
    so they in turn have their work reviewed and improved.
    
    In "full transparency", that's just a few of my thoughts on this
    complicated topic.
    
    
    
    -- 
    
    Best regards,
    Kathleen