IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: IETF Chair

Timothy Mcsweeney <tim@dropnumber.com> Tue, 13 October 2020 21:02 UTC

Return-Path: <tim@dropnumber.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 6A7A03A08E3; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 14:02:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.799
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.799 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_HTML_ONLY=0.1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=no 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 NpHEIWvslpWF; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 14:02:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.196]) (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 2D0CD3A08C3; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 14:02:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from oxuslxaltgw04.schlund.de ([10.72.76.60]) by mrelay.perfora.net (mreueus002 [74.208.5.2]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MFNDu-1keYOa3vMK-00EO8e; Tue, 13 Oct 2020 23:02:00 +0200
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 17:01:59 -0400
From: Timothy Mcsweeney <tim@dropnumber.com>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, "Salz, Rich" <rsalz=40akamai.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Cc: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <1799122003.173083.1602622919370@email.ionos.com>
In-Reply-To: <FDB2D034-AC8C-46E6-9306-321D820EE297@tzi.org>
References: <2B51679C-2BED-4F7B-B146-FF1524B00AA5@akamai.com> <C775E80B-9A31-492E-BA6A-96F9FE831316@akamai.com> <128277543.164613.1602611739735@email.ionos.com> <FDB2D034-AC8C-46E6-9306-321D820EE297@tzi.org>
Subject: Re: IETF Chair
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Priority: 3
Importance: Normal
X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v7.10.3-Rev22
X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite
X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:iXIHwnv1qnkadGVqrlvejweoNGxAPPyYmPaool5TcmfXk4My3rC kiHwRxLL2f2KPU21jA0pP/pEIPCuc22lZoKSd7cd9nResbjgjdvOvt4cD6cf7bsEwgjW1NM bb8YQRwiJye59a27RLl5+tFvsd1UW7DAIz0U7kPZl76chLVZrmvdYhh5QRJL6gg/EhXI39u IPMfmDkzmVaQ04DiF9iUQ==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:StnsGRM7jjA=:FrTil38iYuJbNN8T/Po+aQ vHo6UlpycX2zVtRL38Z0G9Rp0GuHK+GYowahqxa9fzU0gBu2VUUBvZaSo2K71XOqV94XB7Lh7 aArEVbH6WH/2ot5VWxpytLEsuDS4qR4tOUfQ2km1fDTwrrxjym95rRlyYE6CKvOZa4JyB8DgO APD0lxgjyYknOPas0oglEI4AbzDCxAr5CjKK/G6Z0y0hFPL3k2Ct8m7C/AeoMy0/zkQCa7Thk z9uFwJKYj1cJYxQyOhIjm57hCvDV0ObaoESun7MtqxqQwiQDUzkbb22XgwHpLvkD33LrZsWr2 f9QOT2FD8Iqnn4rSrontSG2/X58GYxRVgfvNHS36cuIXjpP4hQD/3ungHAS+jLDcP7+IUjwW9 tx23ogdUI/BlN2wBXYXYhcNmhinHiTyT+KgzPbssVZ7X0cK+2vWXBjN5EMxodSrK8jkB+O3ql ZEwHC0q5hg==
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/LTSg9ZsUNuyZLffeyEtwBcK7ZIA>
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, 13 Oct 2020 21:02:12 -0000

Carsten,

>An interesting objective for the IETF chair would be to figure out how to do
>this, while also finding ways to waste less time and energy on contributors
>that receive plenty, unanimous advice why their proposal doesn’t work/help
>and then continue to bring the same thing up again and again. We probably
>need a few more circuit breakers.

What's needed is an automated nits checker for protocol parameters like is used with draft submission.  That would negate the need for all kinds of wasted time for the IESG, designated experts and arguments over RFC intent.  Plus new implementors wouldn't have to keep hearing the same explination on why it won't work over and over again :-)  Either it goes through or it doesn't. 

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email