Re: [arch-d] Call for Comment: <draft-iab-rfc3677bis> (IETF ISOC Board of Trustee Appointment Procedures)

"Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" <jhildebr@cisco.com> Wed, 24 February 2016 22:29 UTC

Return-Path: <jhildebr@cisco.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 1E67D1A00A3; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 14:29:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.507
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.507 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.006, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 rZtKnZeKRXTt; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 14:29:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from alln-iport-1.cisco.com (alln-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.142.88]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F007F1A00C6; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 14:29:10 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1410; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1456352950; x=1457562550; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=oDBjsAhXBP2pgk4LIud+2vAkQ97/QsAU4mFUc5ntp5I=; b=IsJ4mrc0HaEe/jS+MCO6TyDakuPpQEy1R6lpzIIaU7sKW0QCUROUMVqh 3pq/bEDcsnL7YGZtqODIsGOJrCssCzL8bgRCD5NowlVWb4MBisFpzVL4A hbU5I5CbJ0FSV1sl6ODFzsoTYB37UkB2ESYANyX9hf6otNy8jjdy5b5RF 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AQAgANLs5W/5RdJa1egzqBPwa4VIITA?= =?us-ascii?q?Q2BZoYOAhyBIjgUAQEBAQEBAWQnhEIBAQQdBhFFEAIBCBIIAh8HAgICHxEVAg4?= =?us-ascii?q?CBAENBYgKAxKvHIoQDYRDAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBFXuFF4Fsgk6CO?= =?us-ascii?q?oF5gwIrgQ8BBJcHAYtrgXOBXoREiFKHBYdDAR4BAUKCMIE0agGGYn0BAQE?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.22,495,1449532800"; d="scan'208";a="242319075"
Received: from rcdn-core-12.cisco.com ([173.37.93.148]) by alln-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 24 Feb 2016 22:29:10 +0000
Received: from XCH-RCD-003.cisco.com (xch-rcd-003.cisco.com [173.37.102.13]) by rcdn-core-12.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u1OMTAVc000761 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 24 Feb 2016 22:29:10 GMT
Received: from xch-aln-001.cisco.com (173.36.7.11) by XCH-RCD-003.cisco.com (173.37.102.13) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1104.5; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 16:29:09 -0600
Received: from xch-aln-001.cisco.com ([173.36.7.11]) by XCH-ALN-001.cisco.com ([173.36.7.11]) with mapi id 15.00.1104.009; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 16:29:09 -0600
From: "Joe Hildebrand (jhildebr)" <jhildebr@cisco.com>
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>, "architecture-discuss@ietf.org" <architecture-discuss@ietf.org>, IAB <iab@iab.org>
Subject: Re: [arch-d] Call for Comment: <draft-iab-rfc3677bis> (IETF ISOC Board of Trustee Appointment Procedures)
Thread-Topic: [arch-d] Call for Comment: <draft-iab-rfc3677bis> (IETF ISOC Board of Trustee Appointment Procedures)
Thread-Index: AQHRbzaOs4u9An9ut02Cw3ysLZKTcZ87tlwA
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 22:29:09 +0000
Message-ID: <4572E392-3E57-45C4-9CBF-86B3E2E0982A@cisco.com>
References: <20160224175935.21103.69618.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAC4RtVDpMsFuSMHPvkT2vXngGJkNsWDqL-g1EipcCUNjqa2Ssg@mail.gmail.com> <56CDFF39.7000603@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <56CDFF39.7000603@gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/0.0.0.160109
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [10.19.203.24]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-ID: <154852FCAB3C5C419AE660C04A276E03@emea.cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/n5a9Utm9moLxOqiaNOJSDi5HZCE>
Cc: IETF discussion list <ietf@ietf.org>
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: <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: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 22:29:20 -0000

On 2/24/16, 12:06 PM, "Architecture-discuss on behalf of Brian E Carpenter" <architecture-discuss-bounces@ietf.org on behalf of brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:



>> 
>> While this is certainly expedient, it's quite open-ended, entirely
>> left up to the judgment of the sitting IAB about what "reasonable
>> modifications" might mean.  Certainly, with a by-law change that adds
>> a board appointment, most anyone would consider it reasonable to just
>> add that appointment with the appropriate periodicity, and it's
>> reasonable not to have to rev this document for that.
>
>Yes, but I think this needs to be circumscribed. Wouldn't it be better
>to require that BCP 77 is appropriately updated within 12 months in
>such a case, i.e. trust the IAB to do the right thing but also commit
>to updating the rules accordingly?

I guess I'm ok with that. We could also trust the IAB to know the difference between a substantive change and a minor one.

Anyway, please propose text.

-- 
Joe Hildebrand