Re: IESG Statement on surprised authors

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Sun, 31 May 2015 10:39 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
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 040F81A09C9 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 31 May 2015 03:39:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, 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 48kjnTqKJ43i for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 31 May 2015 03:39:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no (mork.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.117]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64B281A06FD for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 31 May 2015 03:39:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD77B7C078C for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 31 May 2015 12:39:27 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at alvestrand.no
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mork.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id oPG_8_sQia6o for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 31 May 2015 12:39:26 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:470:de0a:27:1d12:e125:6eda:2001] (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:de0a:27:1d12:e125:6eda:2001]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 53D707C061A for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 31 May 2015 12:39:26 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <556AE4DD.3000903@alvestrand.no>
Date: Sun, 31 May 2015 12:39:25 +0200
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: IESG Statement on surprised authors
References: <20150529205551.22495.73800.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <2F99A0C05DFEE698A643FC97@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <938E070C-A69A-4D37-9B33-3CB07E09595C@piuha.net> <5568F568.9060407@bogus.com> <5568FE28.1090600@gmail.com> <55695D53.3000004@cisco.com> <E3C9C304-EFA2-4C47-AC57-354BEDDC1984@umn.edu> <981C94AECB2DFB46F0990A84@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <CAKKJt-fw_AtNoAJRi62Q5yzkUyYEUXH7L+dwVy6c=xsX2ToADA@mail.gmail.com> <532882A8F7829F80DB25BB19@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <556ACBE1.3050104@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <556ACBE1.3050104@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/Xcq7Ho1Vwiox9BoqgM4mRcme7kU>
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: Sun, 31 May 2015 10:39:32 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Den 31. mai 2015 10:52, skrev Eliot Lear:
> Whereas I take issue with the IESG (and IAB) making statements
> that should be handled (a) through our normative processes and
> document series; and (b) where there should be certain standards
> across our document series, and this is one of them.

Now this statement is about Internet-Drafts, not about the RFC series
or any substream thereof.

If we figured out who is in charge of the Internet Drafts mechanism as
a whole, that body might be the right one to make pronouncements for
the whole whatever-it-is. (I don't think we've ever called the
Internet drafts a document series...)

I don't think we've figured out that yet. And it's a separate topic.

> 
> On 5/31/15 3:38 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
>> 
>> --On Saturday, May 30, 2015 18:19 -0500 Spencer Dawkins at IETF 
>> <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> More broadly than just to John ...
>> And my note was a little bit of an over-specific response to 
>> Eliot and David.  To be clear, modulo the quibble about putting 
>> one toe into the Acknowledgments swamp, rather than either 
>> keeping it out or jumping in all the way, I think the IESG's 
>> handling of this is, AFAICT, just right and shows sensitivity to 
>> all of the right issues.   I am also reasonably confident that, 
>> if the IESG does not assert authority I don't think it has or 
>> should have, the other streams and the RSE can (and likely will) 
>> take care of themselves.  I didn't see any signs of such 
>> assertions before in this situation; your note provides 
>> reassurance that I didn't just miss them :-)
>> 
>> john
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
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=UqE5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----