Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-resnick-variance-00.txt

Pete Resnick <resnick@episteme.net> Fri, 27 March 2020 20:02 UTC

Return-Path: <resnick@episteme.net>
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 5C59F3A09F7 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 13:02:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, 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 SQXuM_FBWyP4 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 13:02:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from episteme.net (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 891273A0867 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 13:02:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7184AA56E1C6 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 15:02:51 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from episteme.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (episteme.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rnRDFz651bi6 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 15:02:48 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from [172.16.1.18] (episteme.net [216.169.5.102]) by episteme.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0B2BFA56E1B4 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 15:02:47 -0500 (CDT)
From: Pete Resnick <resnick@episteme.net>
To: IETF <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-resnick-variance-00.txt
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 15:02:47 -0500
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5671)
Message-ID: <AE66200A-E718-4BF6-BA87-EE427A0BF971@episteme.net>
References: <158533925458.17797.13806166303625482245@ietfa.amsl.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"; markup="markdown"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/_zFK6BV4HrRA7Vq_6ykgIuWUeHk>
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: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 20:02:55 -0000

When I posted my suggestion for the short-term fix for the 2020-2021 
NomCom, I mentioned that we would have to publish it as a BCP. Offline, 
Barry asked me why I thought publishing a new BCP was necessary for this 
one-off exception. But we don't have a mechanism in the IETF to directly 
violate a requirement of a BCP without writing another BCP. (Even the 
variance procedure for the standards-track document process defined in 
2026 section 9 requires a published BCP.) He suggested that maybe we 
should have a process to do so. So I wrote a 3-page (well, 2-page plus 
boilerplate) BCP for a variance procedure for one-off or short-lived 
circumstances. I stole most of the text from 2026 section 9. If folks 
think this is sane, this will give us a simple procedure for saying, 
"Crazy thing happened that doesn't need to be documented beyond the 
mailing list and the IETF web site."

pr
-- 
Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/
All connections to the world are tenuous at best

Forwarded message:

> From: internet-drafts@ietf.org
> To: Pete Resnick <resnick@episteme.net>, Peter W. Resnick 
> <resnick@episteme.net>
> Subject: New Version Notification for draft-resnick-variance-00.txt
> Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 13:00:54 -0700
>
> A new version of I-D, draft-resnick-variance-00.txt
> has been successfully submitted by Peter W. Resnick and posted to the
> IETF repository.
>
> Name:		draft-resnick-variance
> Revision:	00
> Title:		Variances to Provisions of Best Current Practices
> Document date:	2020-03-27
> Group:		Individual Submission
> Pages:		3
> URL:            
> https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-resnick-variance-00.txt
> Status:         
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-resnick-variance/
> Htmlized:       https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-resnick-variance-00
> Htmlized:       
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-resnick-variance
>
>
> Abstract:
>    From time to time, there are unforeseen circumstances which make
>    following the requirements of a Best Current Practice (BCP)
>    untenable, or where the procedures described in the BCP gives no
>    guidance.  This document defines a process for the IETF to grant a
>    variance to any IETF process for a single use or of very short
>    duration.
>
>
>
>
> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of 
> submission
> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.
>
> The IETF Secretariat