Re: And a third [was: A couple of opinion pieces]

[Leif Johansson <[e-mail]>]

Skickat från min iPhone

> 15 juli 2019 kl. 20:29 skrev Richard Barnes <[e-mail]>:
> 
>  
> 
>> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 2:19 PM Leif Johansson <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Skickat från min iPhone
>> 
>>> 15 juli 2019 kl. 20:15 skrev Richard Barnes <[e-mail]>:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 1:37 PM Leif Johansson <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Skickat från min iPhone
>>>> 
>>>> > 15 juli 2019 kl. 18:22 skrev Christian Huitema <[e-mail]>:
>>>> > 
>>>> > Brian,
>>>> > 
>>>> > This is an interesting piece, and I share your assessment of the IAB's
>>>> > situation in the late 90's. But I continue to be very skeptical of your
>>>> > references to a "much wider community".
>>>> > 
>>>> > To assess that, I just did a small exercise of listing all the RFC
>>>> > published in the "independent" stream in 2018. There are 14 such RFC:
>>>> > 8507, 8494, 8493, 8492, 8483, 8479, 8433, 8409, 8374, 8369, 8367, 8351,
>>>> > 8328 and 8324. 8369 is an April's fool RFC. RFC 8367 and 8369 were
>>>> > published on 1 April 2018. I looked at the authors of these RFC, and did
>>>> > a quick check: are these outsiders, part of a "wider community" or are
>>>> > these people who are also contributing to the IETF. The overwhelming
>>>> > response is, "insiders". Pretty much all the authors are or were
>>>> > involved in the IETF, many of them with a prominent track record. There
>>>> > are just 2 exceptions, a single RFC in which only 3 of the 5 authors are
>>>> > well associated with the IETF.
>>>> > 
>>>> > There may well be a wider community of people who could publish
>>>> > independent RFC, or for that matter who could participate in the IETF.
>>>> > But data analysis does not indicate that these people participate in the
>>>> > RFC series.
>>>> > 
>>>> 
>>>> cf my post elsewhere on this list on how digital identitiy development moved away from pkix (and the IETF)
>>>> 
>>>> This seems like a perfect illustration of the streetlight effect (I admit I had to make google find the name for me). 
>>>> 
>>>> We have no knowledge of why other communities choose not to publish in the RFC series because we don’t have data about any other communities. 
>>> 
>>> This seems to presume that it would be desirable for other communities to publish in the RFC series.  (I presume you mean, "other than the IETF/IAB/IRTF community".)  Is that your belief, and if so, could you say why?
>> 
>> No I don’t
>> 
>> A more interesting question is this: what happened to make the openidc (to pick a random example) not even consider making RFCs their publication ”format”.
> 
> Now I'm confused.  If it's not desirable for other communities to publish RFCs, why does this question matter?
> 

Because if we can figure out what we did (if anything) to discourage this then maybe there some useful clue to be had there.

> --Richard
> 
>  
>> 
>>> 
>>> --Richard
>>> 
>>>  
>>>> 
>>>> qed - unless... you go talk to some other SDOs and similar organisations... almost like a liason-function might.
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers Leif
>>>> 
>>>> > -- Christian Huitema
>>>> > 
>>>> > 
>>>> >> On 7/14/2019 9:19 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>>> >> Various recent discussions here have made me think that the IETF is
>>>> >> at a point where some fundamentals in the standards process, the
>>>> >> publication process, and its basic organization need to be re-evaluated
>>>> >> and perhaps changed. The goal of course would be to make the IETF more
>>>> >> useful, not change for its own sake.
>>>> >> 
>>>> >> It's above my pay grade to decide whether to start an organized
>>>> >> approach to this, but in addition to the two opinion pieces mentioned
>>>> >> below, please also consider this:
>>>> >> https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~brian/CommentaryIAB.pdf
>>>> >> This is about the institution, not the people. Please read the opening
>>>> >> disclaimer, and of course comments are welcome, as always.
>>>> >> 
>>>> >> Regards
>>>> >>   Brian Carpenter
>>>> >> 
>>>> >>> On 20-Jun-19 16:24, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>>>> >>> Hi,
>>>> >>> 
>>>> >>> The first document is early input to the 2019-2020 NomCom and to
>>>> >>> all those thinking of volunteering for it, or for any of the
>>>> >>> open leadership positions:
>>>> >>> 
>>>> >>> Some Thoughts on IETF Community Leadership
>>>> >>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-carpenter-community-leaders-01
>>>> >>> 
>>>> >>> The second one is also relevant to NomCom, but also to those who
>>>> >>> will be involved in the process of identifying the future RFC Series
>>>> >>> Editor, and to those who care about the IETF standards process in general:
>>>> >>> 
>>>> >>> Request for Comments
>>>> >>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-carpenter-request-for-comments-01
>>>> >>> 
>>>> >>> Comments are most welcome, but these documents are both personal opinions.
>>>> >>> 
>>>> >>> Regards
>>>> >>>   Brian Carpenter
>>>> >>> 
>>>> > 
>>>>