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

["Adrian Farrel" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Ralph,

> Here are my opinions on how to proceed...
> 
> First, it's important that RFC 2418 be updated to allow for a WG
> secretary to take on greater responsibilities, at the discretion of
> the WG chairs.  It's also important that the update include formal
> recognition that WG secretaries should be given access to WG support
> tools.  Therefore, I recommend that RFC 2418 be updated with a short
> RFC that expands the potential role for WG secretaries and that
> formally grants permission for secretaries to have access to WG tools.

I have not seen your draft revising RFC 2418. Did I miss it or are you
recommending that other people do work?

I'm sure that if you start this work others will send you their review comments.

> Second, because the [the document contains] a series of recommendations
> that may not apply to all WGs and that may change over time, I
> recommend that this very useful material be integrated into the IETF
> wiki "Working Group Chairs' Page" <http://www.ietf.org/wg/chairs-page.html>

The document even recommends doing that.

The authors, however, thought that just like the way the Tao evolved, there is
advantage in having community review and consensus of the starting text. This
can then be updated through the wiki as the situation evolves.

Does that community review and consensus need to be published through an RFC?
Probably not, but it is a convenient way to do so. 
Does publication as an Informational RFC somehow ossify the recommendations? I
don't think so.

Cheers,
Adrian