Re: Last Call: <draft-secretaries-good-practices-06.txt> (IETF Working Groups' Secretaries) to Best Current Practice

Martin Vigoureux <martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com> Mon, 08 December 2014 14:36 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 855571A9076 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Dec 2014 06:36:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 4KqjegNYEtz3 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Dec 2014 06:36:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp-fr.alcatel-lucent.com (fr-hpgre-esg-01.alcatel-lucent.com [135.245.210.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D384A1A9083 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Dec 2014 06:36:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from us70tusmtp1.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (unknown [135.5.2.63]) by Websense Email Security Gateway with ESMTPS id 09404D2A23A41 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Dec 2014 14:36:01 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from US70UWXCHHUB02.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (us70uwxchhub02.zam.alcatel-lucent.com [135.5.2.49]) by us70tusmtp1.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id sB8Ea3FY032074 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL) for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Dec 2014 09:36:03 -0500
Received: from [135.244.8.228] (135.5.27.18) by US70UWXCHHUB02.zam.alcatel-lucent.com (135.5.2.49) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Mon, 8 Dec 2014 09:36:02 -0500
Message-ID: <5485B74E.4080102@alcatel-lucent.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 15:35:58 +0100
From: Martin Vigoureux <martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-secretaries-good-practices-06.txt> (IETF Working Groups' Secretaries) to Best Current Practice
References: <20140612132656.8100.57197.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAL0qLwZEo-AN4Er0gmbCyWJwTqOKBUKKMHEMQ_YqhK+oB+pcgg@mail.gmail.com> <547E9DBA.9040703@pi.nu> <0c1001d00ee9$36598670$a30c9350$@olddog.co.uk> <D51141636F7AC8CBFE11FA93@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
In-Reply-To: <D51141636F7AC8CBFE11FA93@JcK-HP8200.jck.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Originating-IP: [135.5.27.18]
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/EBHgK6r9Pz9qWxY5kTBUt3LvHIc
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 14:36:08 -0000

Hello John,

Le 03/12/2014 15:40, John C Klensin a écrit :
> The following paragraph,
>     "The framework and perimeter of action associated to the WG
>     Secretary's role, depends on the WG Secretary and the
>     Chairs, as well as on the professional relationship they
>     establish. Therefore this document does not prescribe what
>     must be performed, but lists what might be performed by a WG
>     Secretary. Also, this list is intended to be as complete as
>     possible, but it shall not be considered as exhaustive. This
>     document is therefore not a rigid job description."
> effectively contradicts what has come before, possibly to blunt
> some of the type of the criticism I (and others) have voiced.
> Its effect, however, is merely to contradict and create
> confusion.

This paragraph (minus few mods) has been in the draft since 00, while 
comments only came on 05/06. So, no, this paragraph is not here to blunt 
some of the type of criticism you and others have voice.

This is definitely not the spirit in which I and the other authors of 
this document have written it.

Best regards,
Martin