Re: Recent threads concerning sergeants-at-arms

[Michael StJohns <[e-mail]>]

On 9/2/2019 9:51 PM, Alissa Cooper wrote:

Hi Alissa - I appreciate you have a particular point of view about what 
you think is appropriate discussion on the IETF mailing list, but I 
think you're missing the point that what's important is the topic and 
its important to more than RFC format geeks  ( :-) )that hang out on the 
rfc-interest mailing list.  I also think you're mis-reading 3005. I 
don't think we're quite ready to discuss the technical aspects of the 
RFC series - and that's the appropriate set of discussions for 
rfc-interest, not the philosophy of the oversight of the RFC series and 
process.

>
> Matthew made a suggestion to use a mailing list controlled by the RFC 
> Series Editor for discussion about an RFC Series-related SOW, based on 
> the charter of this list described in RFC 3005. 

As SAA, it's rare that such a posting would be considered just a 
suggestion.    I myself didn't actually take it as just a suggestion.  
Eliot beat me in providing pushback.

> It would be great if people decide to follow his suggestion, as some 
> have already. If not, I am confident that the RSOC and the IAB will 
> take into account what they read here between now and September 14 
> when the SOW comment period closes and I am optimistic that the 
> discussion on rfc-interest, on this list, and everywhere in the IETF 
> can remain respectful. My hope is that people will use the next 12 
> days to contemplate the email Sarah sent and provide their feedback.

Neither Matthew nor you appear to be reading the same things out of 3005 
as the rest of us - I'd be interested in how you interpret this topic in 
a manner to suggest that its an inappropriate topic for the IETF list.

> RFC3005: In addition to the topics noted above, appropriate postings include:
>
>      - Last Call discussions of proposed protocol actions
>      - Discussion of technical issues that are candidates for IETF work,
>        but do not yet have an appropriate e-mail venue
>      - Discussion of IETF administrative policies
>      - Questions and clarifications concerning IETF meetings
>      - Announcements of conferences, events, or activities that are
>        sponsored or endorsed by the Internet Society or IETF.
>
>     Inappropriate postings include:
>
>      - Unsolicited bulk e-mail
>      - Discussion of subjects unrelated to IETF policy, meetings,
>        activities, or technical concerns
>      - Unprofessional commentary, regardless of the general subject
>      - Announcements of conferences, events, or activities that are not
>        sponsored or endorsed by the Internet Society or IETF.

Later, Mike




>
> Cheers,
> Alissa Cooper
> IETF Chair
>
> [1] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/Q3f9FnFcrWKRySD-DqQCgI6lbCw
> [2] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/-3M3WswGZ_0zvYvDMO4f_J58qtQ
> [3] https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/M2d85XpOOR4tm78yGyh205iJWJc
> [4] See slides 14 to 18 of 
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/105/materials/slides-105-ietf-sessa-all-slides-ietf-105-administrativeoperations-plenary