IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Why do we have working group charters (was: To "lose the argument in the WG")

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Sun, 19 February 2017 13:02 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
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 8E2401294AA for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 Feb 2017 05:02:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 EytU3uzCUZLm for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 19 Feb 2017 05:02:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt0-x22b.google.com (mail-qt0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E74AD1294A6 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 19 Feb 2017 05:02:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id n21so2631702qta.1 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 19 Feb 2017 05:02:23 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=yVNPnrqfpvvzU0xmO7qRZ3jnn7VXx/YSP5M4ogF1uT0=; b=cW+rcIlbGh5rmzf6AHBcUuQreMPcCZDiFIZoUffDFeXGS9H539QR39atCYsR5Aa8sh c5A2xE2bxtmlv8LQgFNTwOIXOvQRSgZJP1RxfB/EqaN17Zx13M+1xMDwNrJPTkSaf8QW Tnti1rdLYJz1Nin0mhqqiIWHEOYRv+OpEevtSqAb1sFqAgo+U/79WtzAt9nlSVu2jvKh ZeeIZcFqrvP5mDCnx8r3s+IJ/obeTdE6y9zRS3a33r2BYnYBIy22fUb7ubDZT2lsIVMk hUOxRbtZeWGLuc8jEplm2Z9eKINjpMcqZpZQHN9xZIBa0dauBRxNkGYLlOoPcozsTxt0 kTLQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=yVNPnrqfpvvzU0xmO7qRZ3jnn7VXx/YSP5M4ogF1uT0=; b=RhDg9+YZA+PNv5qEkUQw6ITtTzT44fj5IJI2+2cRT8fbIPSSnBEJ4kA+hYGwTUXVKh D+FCpSF1GYCxR3f7pENR6ZSlRzRTrp0dVNCZHl2Xa3iXyuvpYbscBqZ5nqzR6k+s2Qu5 q5TbmemYreC4Uno2O6+Wtj4uHp1bldtZHykyQDsXZYAihqhZHfBV9gT28qUhtZbOEOfi JnJURWOzGCd1lxbaKn7RtwNQjgcrMwR/eI7ODFiA8ACAmvGOzb4u45fWap3Zsze3NIY0 wAzMXMN4wauiPTu6sC+frvmCnZvc/ePv64IDHyUdjJcwkGubX9QT6GT3CxUsm5wGDEGO Okaw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39n7nYwrmi4br75bQz1HesEH/ylg3lWd+63OC7CI1HdYTtPjzmF0Ldb5ENhKlEiXJQ==
X-Received: by 10.200.36.81 with SMTP id d17mr14587673qtd.99.1487509342954; Sun, 19 Feb 2017 05:02:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.228] (c-73-167-64-188.hsd1.ma.comcast.net. [73.167.64.188]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y23sm10254978qtc.38.2017.02.19.05.02.19 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 19 Feb 2017 05:02:21 -0800 (PST)
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Message-Id: <F4558EC8-87BB-4FA5-A55E-7FA6C9605CA6@fugue.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_0F6A5130-8569-4983-B6A1-933EF7807305"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
Subject: Re: Why do we have working group charters (was: To "lose the argument in the WG")
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2017 08:02:16 -0500
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20170218205437.09c36548@elandnews.com>
To: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
References: <66A86016-0382-4B2C-B9E8-30638237CB68@qti.qualcomm.com> <00e13499-7cea-a79a-7de1-dd9bad4bc530@dcrocker.net> <20170214060156.73B32639AEDF@rock.dv.isc.org> <0A3B2FF0-8F1C-430E-B4ED-DFA4CDB1FDB3@gmail.com> <0FB75520-E0BA-453C-8CF6-9F2D05B95FD6@fugue.com> <76d4aff3-760c-b258-a4e5-426ba69923f7@dcrocker.net> <84E813AE-6BD6-4EC3-A8CD-8AB24C9857D2@qti.qualcomm.com> <20170215025055.GW10525@verdi> <6.2.5.6.2.20170218010720.0b845c18@elandnews.com> <AB7BB4019CE95D16CA7B0B8D@PSB> <6.2.5.6.2.20170218152825.0c4d7d68@elandnews.com> <EF9DE86E-C964-4E92-BA48-B1555786C19B@fugue.com> <D8B7C051-53A1-4EEC-A639-88767C5B3BC4@fugue.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20170218205437.09c36548@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/e9jCaeO9T1kHJvZc_m7mqXu0AaA>
Cc: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Sun, 19 Feb 2017 13:02:25 -0000

On Feb 19, 2017, at 2:07 AM, S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> wrote:
>> And this is why the IETF community shouldn't treat charter updates as pro forma.   Charter review is an important part of the feedback mechanism that keeps the IETF a consensus-driven organization.   Doing out-of-charter work, or lawyering the charter to say that work that really isn't part of the intent of the charter nevertheless conforms to the letter of the charter, bypasses this important step.
> 
> Describing the process issue as "lawyering" conveys the idea that it is unreasonable to complain about such issues.  I agree with what you wrote about the feedback mechanism.

By lawyering, I mean the practice of trying to fit more in the charter than those who participated in writing that charter intended for it to cover.   This is a very fine line: there are definitely cases where one can legitimately debate what the actual intention expressed in the charter is.   For this reason I think it's best for ADs to err on the side of caution and update the charter if an AD thinks they might be at the edge.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email