IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Mon, 08 December 2014 23:41 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
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 1D0951A00B2 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Dec 2014 15:41:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] 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 HhcuETimsONg for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Dec 2014 15:41:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (asmtp1.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.248]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C2171A006E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Dec 2014 15:41:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from asmtp1.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id sB8NfH95022133; Mon, 8 Dec 2014 23:41:17 GMT
Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp1.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id sB8NfE3P022104 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 8 Dec 2014 23:41:15 GMT
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: 'Brian E Carpenter' <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, 'Martin Vigoureux' <martin.vigoureux@alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <20140612132656.8100.57197.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAL0qLwZEo-AN4Er0gmbCyWJwTqOKBUKKMHEMQ_YqhK+oB+pcgg@mail.gmail.com> <547E9DBA.9040703@pi.nu> <0c1001d00ee9$36598670$a30c9350$@olddog.co.uk> <D51141636F7AC8CBFE11FA93@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <547F23AD.90206@gmail.com> <F1301BDF5BA91E9561C6654C@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <0c7901d00f12$f6790a60$e36b1f20$@olddog.co.uk> <547F37C7.6030207@gmail.com> <0cbf01d00f1f$853f10d0$8fbd3270$@olddog.co.uk> <547F4CF2.9020707@gmail.com> <m261dnje1v.wl%randy@psg.com> <9DD12708-7020-4F59-9A58-40A74E9E96FA@gmail.com> <54860203.4050906@gmail.com> <548608B0.5090100@gmail.com> <CAL0qLwbjEZ779+kyokZ3ojBt5Uq7M+y__3CX1FXdszbJ3Ck5Ww@mail.gmail.com> <54860DBA.1010206@alcatel-lucent.com> <54861D7F.402@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <54861D7F.402@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: Last Call: <draft-secretaries-good-practices-06.txt> (IETF Working Groups' Secretaries) to Best Current Practice
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 23:41:09 -0000
Message-ID: <029501d01340$730f6d90$592e48b0$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQIDrSy+BS7nGKTH8AB3jI0uaBTw3wHfUf3eAfnYkx8BQ7zzegMOvf3JAOAcIbsCIb7gPgDC7XYNAb2A2z0CUE3dIQLkqN36AbVLBeMB69j8VgEcMZ+uAuUilxUB+W9/mwHfjoMNAtvEnAebFVU3QA==
Content-Language: en-gb
X-TM-AS-MML: disable
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: IMSS-7.1.0.1576-7.5.0.1018-21160.003
X-TM-AS-Result: No--14.136-10.0-31-10
X-imss-scan-details: No--14.136-10.0-31-10
X-TMASE-MatchedRID: VPleTT1nwdQzx9GDMr0HvzYTypjB3iDVuikHZcC6ceA/vgFpaLdKGyK9 8Qsbwk3XpYfaWEleoIAaUpVUcgW8am5errMz3uv68eSmTJSmEv1QLEPuT4LD+VVMJlS9HCuz+bR hP5t1aq5nRWDVIEo4fWB8ZakMX64GtU092nQHWQc/243uH7/LVWtJGpZ1j3AJlxrbJNbm/wR2RA 7dwpY2g3xfrkK2CBS7kZOl7WKIImrvXOvQVlExsAtuKBGekqUpI/NGWt0UYPCZLy04e/kECAcgK 060IzJcqatFvFx6kyywW7KGp5CE5tMNqm6sBWZl
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/WdQCI0jnoTBYroFGW4PAKTvJzds
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
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 23:41:23 -0000

> > Section 6:
> >    Nevertheless, while the WG Chairs may delegate a number of tasks to
> >    the Secretary, they maintain the overall responsibility and
> >    accountability over the WG and the decisions and actions that are
> >    taken.
> 
> Which is good stuff, like most of the content. I think the
> argument is not about the quality of the draft, but about
> whether it needs to be a BCP.

If only the "argument" was founded on reading the draft!

Network Working Group                                      M. Vigoureux
Internet Draft                                           Alcatel-Lucent
Intended status: Informational                                  D. King
Expires: May 2015                                    Old Dog Consulting
                                                           C. Pignataro
                                                    Cisco Systems, Inc.

                                                      November 11, 2014

                     IETF Working Groups' Secretaries
                    draft-secretaries-good-practices-07

Who is currently asking for this to be a BCP?
And why are we having that "argument"?

Adrian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email