Re: Changes to the way we manage RFPs

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 26 February 2020 20:39 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
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 A1E783A13F2; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 12:39:28 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.888
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.888 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 NQL0ht2YqpDB; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 12:39:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8800F3A13F4; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 12:39:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62C7F38982; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 15:38:25 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8D60E72; Wed, 26 Feb 2020 15:39:26 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Jay Daley <jay@ietf.org>
cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Changes to the way we manage RFPs
In-Reply-To: <95A6818C-69CB-429F-8235-04D978EDFA4B@ietf.org>
References: <158268693548.11166.3290940777172353007.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <10799.1582721390@localhost> <95A6818C-69CB-429F-8235-04D978EDFA4B@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 25.1.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 15:39:26 -0500
Message-ID: <10136.1582749566@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/KYSdbjM6oBiQE59bLEXAzwmC9XE>
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: Wed, 26 Feb 2020 20:39:29 -0000

Jay Daley <jay@ietf.org> wrote:
    >> On 27/02/2020, at 1:49 AM, Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >> IETF Executive Director <exec-director@ietf.org> wrote:
    >>> 2. We have a new formal process for managing RFPs, published on the
    >>> RFPs page [2].
    >>
    >> Are you, or do you plan to, use any kind of workflow process for RFPs?
    >> (Something that should be outsourced, there are many systems out
    >> there) Will you engage in a digital contract signature system?

    > I am looking at that but our process is sufficiently simple and our
    > volume so low that we can comfortably manage it ourselves.  I’ve
    > managed and participated in far more complex systems that had
    > internally managed workflow.

If our volume is so low, then I'm not convinced we need the rfp-announce list :-)

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>ca>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-