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
- New proposal/New SOW comment period Sarah Banks
- Re: New proposal/New SOW comment period Michael StJohns
- Re: New proposal/New SOW comment period Stephen Farrell
- Re: New proposal/New SOW comment period Sarah Banks
- Re: New proposal/New SOW comment period Matthew A. Miller
- Re: New proposal/New SOW comment period Eliot Lear
- RE: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period Adrian Farrel
- Re: New proposal/New SOW comment period S Moonesamy
- Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW commen… John C Klensin
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Bob Hinden
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Keith Moore
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Adam Roach
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Keith Moore
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Adam Roach
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Bob Hinden
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Adam Roach
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Michael StJohns
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Keith Moore
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Michael
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Adam Roach
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Michael
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Keith Moore
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Eric Rescorla
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Randy Bush
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Benjamin Kaduk
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… John C Klensin
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Keith Moore
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Eric Rescorla
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Randy Bush
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Eric Rescorla
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Randy Bush
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Keith Moore
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Eric Rescorla
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Melinda Shore
- Re: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period Eliot Lear
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Masataka Ohta
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Leif Johansson
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Masataka Ohta
- Re: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period S Moonesamy
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Bob Hinden
- Re: New proposal/New SOW comment period Michael StJohns
- Re: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period Michael StJohns
- SAA Do's and Don'ts Michael StJohns
- Re: SAA Do's and Don'ts Keith Moore
- Re: SAA Do's and Don'ts Melinda Shore
- tone policing (was: SAA Do's and Don'ts) Keith Moore
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Theodore Y. Ts'o
- Re: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period Adam Roach
- Re: SAA Do's and Don'ts John C Klensin
- Re: SAA Do's and Don'ts Masataka Ohta
- Re: tone policing (was: SAA Do's and Don'ts) Mark Nottingham
- Re: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: tone policing Mark Nottingham
- Re: SAA Do's and Don'ts Keith Moore
- Re: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: tone policing Masataka Ohta
- Re: tone policing Mark Nottingham
- Re: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: tone policing Mark Nottingham
- Re: tone policing Rob Sayre
- Re: tone policing Stephen Farrell
- Re: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: tone policing Melinda Shore
- Re: tone policing Masataka Ohta
- Re: tone policing Masataka Ohta
- Re: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: tone policing Adam Roach
- Re: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: tone policing Ted Lemon
- Re: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period Michael StJohns
- Re: tone policing lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk
- Re: tone policing Rob Sayre
- Re: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period Adam Roach
- Re: tone policing Adam Roach
- Re: tone policing Masataka Ohta
- Re: tone policing Dan Harkins
- Re: tone policing Rob Sayre
- Re: tone policing Ted Lemon
- Re: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: tone policing Ted Lemon
- Re: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: tone policing Christer Holmberg
- Re: tone policing Ted Lemon
- Re: tone policing Paul Wouters
- Re: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: tone policing Nick Hilliard
- Re: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: tone policing Nick Hilliard
- Re: tone policing Ted Lemon
- Re: tone policing Dirk-Willem van Gulik
- Re: tone policing Ted Lemon
- Re: tone policing Dan Harkins
- Re: tone policing Adam Roach
- Re: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: tone policing ned+ietf
- Re: tone policing Dan Harkins
- Re: tone policing Randy Bush
- Re: tone policing Theodore Y. Ts'o
- Re: Sergeant-at-Armss and New proposal/New SOW co… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: tone policing Masataka Ohta
- Re: tone policing Patrik Fältström
- Re: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period Sarah Banks
- Re: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period Sarah Banks
- Re: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period Sarah Banks
- RE: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period Adrian Farrel
- Re: tone policing lloyd.wood
- Re: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period Michael StJohns
- Re: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period Michael StJohns
- Re: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period Sarah Banks
- Re: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: tone policing Salz, Rich
- Re: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: tone policing Ted Lemon
- Re: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: tone policing Ted Lemon
- Re: tone policing Viktor Dukhovni
- Re: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: tone policing Ted Lemon
- Re: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: tone policing Paul Wouters
- Re: tone policing Salz, Rich
- Re: tone policing Doug Royer
- Re: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: tone policing Dan Harkins
- Re: tone policing Joel M. Halpern
- Re: tone policing Salz, Rich
- Re: tone policing Salz, Rich
- Re: tone policing Bron Gondwana
- Re: tone policing Dan Harkins
- Re: tone policing Stephen Farrell
- Re: tone policing Brian E Carpenter
- Re: tone policing Dan Harkins
- Re: tone policing Bron Gondwana
- Re: tone policing Masataka Ohta
- Re: tone policing Dan Harkins
- Re: tone policing Ted Lemon
- Re: tone policing Randy Bush
- Re: tone policing Leif Johansson
- Agenda Denial Was: tone policing Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Agenda Denial Was: tone policing Ted Lemon
- Re: Agenda Denial Was: tone policing Paul Wouters
- BIMI: Re: tone policing Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Agenda Denial Was: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: Agenda Denial Was: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: Agenda Denial Was: tone policing Ted Lemon
- Re: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: Agenda Denial Was: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: Agenda Denial Was: tone policing Stan Kalisch
- Re: Agenda Denial Was: tone policing Dan Harkins
- Re: Agenda Denial Was: tone policing Nico Williams
- Re: Agenda Denial Was: tone policing Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Agenda Denial Was: tone policing Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Agenda Denial Was: tone policing Keith Moore
- Re: tone policing Bron Gondwana
- Re: New proposal/New SOW comment period John C Klensin
- Re: New proposal/New SOW comment period Michael Richardson
- Re: New proposal/New SOW comment period John C Klensin
- Re: New proposal/New SOW comment period Sarah Banks
- Re: New proposal/New SOW comment period Sarah Banks
- Re: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period Ted Lemon
- Re: [IAB] New proposal/New SOW comment period Christian Huitema
- Re: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period Sarah Banks
- Re: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period Ted Lemon
- Re: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period Henrik Levkowetz
- Re: [rfc-i] New proposal/New SOW comment period Leif Johansson
- Re: New proposal/New SOW comment period John C Klensin
- Re: New proposal/New SOW comment period (off-topi… S Moonesamy
- Re: New proposal/New SOW comment period Sarah Banks
- Re: [IAB] New proposal/New SOW comment period John C Klensin
- Re: [IAB] New proposal/New SOW comment period Stephen Farrell
- Re: [rfc-i] [IAB] New proposal/New SOW comment pe… Brian E Carpenter
- "community" for the RFC series (was: Re: [rfc-i] … Stephen Farrell
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Brian E Carpenter
- Re: "community" for the RFC series (was: Re: [rfc… John C Klensin
- Re: [IAB] New proposal/New SOW comment period Christian Huitema
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Stephen Farrell
- The IETF, Standards process, and the impact on th… Michael StJohns
- Re: The IETF, Standards process, and the impact o… Nico Williams
- Re: The IETF, Standards process, and the impact o… John C Klensin
- Re: The IETF, Standards process, and the impact o… John C Klensin
- Re: The IETF, Standards process, and the impact o… John C Klensin
- Re: The IETF, Standards process, and the impact o… Nico Williams
- Re: The IETF, Standards process, and the impact o… Michael StJohns
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Christian Huitema
- Re: The IETF, Standards process, and the impact o… Nico Williams
- Re: The IETF, Standards process, and the impact o… Keith Moore
- Re: The IETF, Standards process, and the impact o… John C Klensin
- Re: The IETF, Standards process, and the impact o… Nico Williams
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Leif Johansson
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Stephen Farrell
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Randy Bush
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Brian E Carpenter
- Re: The IETF, Standards process, and the impact o… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: The IETF, Standards process, and the impact o… Keith Moore
- Re: [rfc-i] "community" for the RFC series Henrik Levkowetz
- Re: "community" for the RFC series John C Klensin
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Stephen Farrell
- Re: The IETF, Standards process, and the impact o… Randy Presuhn
- Re: The IETF, Standards process, and the impact o… Christian Huitema
- Re: "community" for the RFC series S Moonesamy
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Brian E Carpenter
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Michael StJohns
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Stephen Farrell
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Stephen Farrell
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Brian E Carpenter
- Re: The IETF, Standards process, and the impact o… Michael Richardson
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Christian Huitema
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Christian Huitema
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Brian E Carpenter
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Stephen Farrell
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Keith Moore
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Christian Huitema
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Stephen Farrell
- Re: [IAB] "community" for the RFC series Colin Perkins
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Brian E Carpenter
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Keith Moore
- Re: "community" for the RFC series Brian E Carpenter