IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 08 December 2014 13:15 UTC

Return-Path: <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
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 62C611A8A4D for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Dec 2014 05:15:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 IowpsAdB0CXO for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 8 Dec 2014 05:15:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qg0-x22c.google.com (mail-qg0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::22c]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1D5391A8A4B for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 8 Dec 2014 05:15:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qg0-f44.google.com with SMTP id z60so3449814qgd.31 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 08 Dec 2014 05:15:00 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=TXrwg6YjP8R8TdgibLQOhgveM8B3SVg84Qq2L6NnfuM=; b=JDvjFfwcLnw7Qc4KfhlK2wYNZweBzsT0MONoLLrB7Vh63sRm5Ti3LxbDJe8OMZn/YD 2EvkmXhecBu9yKfrrcO4MGWkYQ/4Uu8ObCjkf0J+0d+ngjrhmd1X8FssDg5DRhnBY4cV NmakpohP08Kb2E/4A9xrux5MN0VobjjVu9LkSLqM/9k9FRTSWYOtxqmULBO3JTWM7rFs gpHapmcUk31JdN74hKmCSskfT+DQf+lhYyIH0hNvlXrThytIsIo+FnGIWy3bLWonkexR FCzMMMsE3Z2aPtr4IdHDda/feoiwQsZNde7DsoyclCOkbo2kuu13hQOmeDmngVh3Mzxg xjUA==
X-Received: by 10.224.104.1 with SMTP id m1mr51459479qao.92.1418044500159; Mon, 08 Dec 2014 05:15:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:420:2481:20:19b3:b4aa:191c:7f54? ([2001:420:2481:20:19b3:b4aa:191c:7f54]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id s19sm37807941qay.6.2014.12.08.05.14.59 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 08 Dec 2014 05:14:59 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
Subject: Re: Last Call: <draft-secretaries-good-practices-06.txt> (IETF Working Groups' Secretaries) to Best Current Practice
From: Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <9DD12708-7020-4F59-9A58-40A74E9E96FA@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 08:14:58 -0500
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <F7335AB0-5E03-4C92-88A4-BFBA126774D5@gmail.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>
To: IETF Disgust <ietf@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/bSGdzfE7OA0dmDuqnT4C65RnvgU
Cc: Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com>
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: Mon, 08 Dec 2014 13:15:03 -0000

On Dec 8, 2014, at 4:53 AM 12/8/14, Bob Hinden <bob.hinden@gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> On Dec 8, 2014, at 12:22 AM, Randy Bush <randy@psg.com> wrote:
> 
>>>> So it should be possible to reach agreement on text changes that
>>>> would take this tone out of your reading.
>>> 
>>> I actually do not think that it should be published at all, as
>>> I don't think it solves any problem that the IETF is currently
>>> experiencing and I tend to think that it might lead to further
>>> ossification of the organization.  That is to say, I think
>>> that the cost/benefit balance does not work out in favor of
>>> publication.
>> 
>> i agree.  i will not add a bunch of sarcastic analogies about
>> more bureaucratic bumph we just don't need.
>> 
>> i also agree with your suspicion that this is an attept to patch
>> a chairing problem.  one suspects possible iesg unwillingness to
>> bite bullets.
>> 
> 
> I agree.  The list of tasks assigned in this draft to the secretary should be done by the w.g. chairs.  If they can't do these tasks, then they shouldn't be chairs.
> 
> Bob
> 

I agree, as well.  I've come to agree that there's no need for an update to RFC 2418 and no need to publish this document.

Anecdotally, the two WGs I am currently administering do not generate enough admin work to warrant secretaries.

- Ralph

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email