Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW comment period

Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 03 September 2019 19:28 UTC

Return-Path: <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A81D1200D5 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 12:28:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, 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: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 fBqTO8sR2_ol for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 12:28:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lj1-x232.google.com (mail-lj1-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 944EC12008B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 3 Sep 2019 12:28:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lj1-x232.google.com with SMTP id a22so81800ljd.0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 03 Sep 2019 12:28:01 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=MuFWte+L1wf0Uxwxmq1orJ0t6xujRqanFyaeXZK4CfY=; b=dc0jl77s+1CstZCFdxqOgmzv+772ZREAHhZMaZpAvNbXgCjrGSwsqN3ZQ8MozZmjHT 4Y4CxicD6fbK9LkZEzLb8TMSlSIadnAvYt1erKwyY8jxABNrCFDqwN5bgDFh4n3oD4oU vkjg0oKQKc9iQilYtbBSa7QL8vk5yb3auJlNMSIVYzQ2R/xWPTyxfViep2vUnohP5ZOE BF3EkeDl4A/s+HF00eGo/x1wPwVm5pykywnQz8Lg6YG+vlQHM/NbppmGNnGu1s80d4PO kICZQJYDHtFQKD7L+IxsPP2UsziwDSi/tbuNZXln4IZrqzzDIngj/sHz08LkICbY6M/T YHiA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=MuFWte+L1wf0Uxwxmq1orJ0t6xujRqanFyaeXZK4CfY=; b=KnuVppb1CM+0ObjkoHD9d9noowI/HQVTHBcbOnC84AVltR7ir3GCDFGyLDYmGU4kDx icIqIkhB6JZ2hJy48IpfBMPGN70rKrWHKlsXSbjYPvNCI9RRrM9X0S8aheOELBU3Yfle EVLd9e439NW0vDoDUGFTljy0CsX5Gq0swdozzjp2YDcho9I+YsTrZoBBZrx7CAhevLEM kDPzU+HzwG/AtZF0fSbrvAb9oWgdteZbP5J48beekrjx4Ebq4gebxTFIAO5aYOg3TrAZ 6b7KxltceHfGONoAoM/9BhZqHgelUa1Whw2peLmrUvRbk0xxn4WTOChZCC62ZcGnI3Wj S2xg==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWx/9qEvF8128P5Cg0fmMTLH58WWdBVwo+IoZ3TaubxCCDSm8Mn bvyrh0MS68UKXDPhuwkjZhbfGGpXmUpL5Q5s42Y=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwP34ouCjTne1ceL9av20x7Z78qL2TfmBFAcf47eDwTqCZjh4BjmwYLJvy2ZcLCR1TDrTn1iXcyU83+Ueql9ZQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a2e:85d7:: with SMTP id h23mr21708321ljj.129.1567538879761; Tue, 03 Sep 2019 12:27:59 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <061D2F46-71C3-4260-B203-73B07EB59418@encrypted.net> <5B276430-96A9-44EA-929B-B9C2325AFCA5@encrypted.net> <863c6fa8-2735-b2c6-5542-d5d100485a6e@outer-planes.net> <10843FAF-66D2-483D-96AB-2F993803AAC6@cisco.com> <6FA9D85E1B425914CA994AFD@PSB> <96294b14-bee3-9045-fb5c-7984302d198e@network-heretics.com> <f922bf27-1f3f-8ded-f934-a00f0a2e9769@nostrum.com> <5C25F4C2-0B49-41F0-A2C4-025C388E278B@gmail.com> <4E57C402-2305-430D-9FA0-50377F50DAA4@nostrum.com> <876EC772-37E4-413C-8FA6-A8744D6A9A33@gmail.com> <20190902221654.GD3367@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <20190902221654.GD3367@mit.edu>
From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2019 14:27:32 -0500
Message-ID: <CAKKJt-e_SoCGU4JB4tZPvsoo4TPQme1ye=jXNdTdi8VPMkSEwA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW comment period
To: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>, Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>, IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000001993af0591ab169b"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/2rc79pHqEGFacSMagz1jZQx2_OI>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Sep 2019 19:28:04 -0000

Hi, Ted,

On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 5:18 PM Theodore Y. Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote:

[deleted down to]


> I'll also add that it probably helped that I didn't hold another IETF
> leadership role, since it never meant that there was any question of
> any conflict of interest that I might be trying to "supervise" some
> discussion that was, say, critical of the IESG as a body.
>
> To the extent that Ben also serves an Security AD, regardless of
> whether he is executing his role in good faith, when there comes a
> time people are questioning decisions by the IETF leadership, it's
> going to make it harder for him to fulfill his role as S-A-A.  And
> please note that I am not arguing that he *has* abused his role; just
> that when faith in the IETF leadership might be lacking in some
> quarters, there may very well be a perception of abuse ---
> *especially* when trying to "manage" discussion might get perceived as
> a way of shutting down criticism of IETF leadership.
>

Thanks for sending this as part of your note.

I have great respect for Ben Kaduk, based on talking with him weekly when
we served together on the IESG, and I would have struggled to distinguish
between "Ben the S-A-A" and "Ben the AD", no matter which hat he said he
was wearing at any point in time. People who don't talk to Ben weekly would
likely struggle more.


> If, in the future, there is a desire to open up RFC 3005 for
> improvements, one change which might be appropriate is a very strong
> suggestion to maintain a greater separation of roles to minimize the
> perception of conflicts of interest.
>

You're right, to point to the possible *perception* of conflict, no matter
how careful a person serving in both roles is about disambiguating
comments.

I think what we're looking at is something similar to the reason why I was
asked to resign from the IAB when Nomcom selected me for the IESG - it's
not that people might not be able to trust me in either role, it's that
they honestly couldn't figure out what the relationship between what
"Spencer the AD" was saying and what "Spencer the IAB member" was thinking,
and replacing me on the IAB was a small price to pay, to avoid that
confusion.

IMO, of course.

Spencer