Re: A sad farewell

"Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu> Thu, 05 November 2020 17:41 UTC

Return-Path: <tytso@mit.edu>
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 F3C883A1935 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 09:41:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 v4EWN4GLECPM for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 09:41:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (outgoing-auth-1.mit.edu [18.9.28.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 673D23A1919 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 09:41:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from callcc.thunk.org (pool-72-74-133-215.bstnma.fios.verizon.net [72.74.133.215]) (authenticated bits=0) (User authenticated as tytso@ATHENA.MIT.EDU) by outgoing.mit.edu (8.14.7/8.12.4) with ESMTP id 0A5HfRrx017932 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:41:28 -0500
Received: by callcc.thunk.org (Postfix, from userid 15806) id 9B4B0420107; Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:41:27 -0500 (EST)
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 12:41:27 -0500
From: "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <tytso@mit.edu>
To: Stewart Bryant <stewart.bryant@gmail.com>
Cc: IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: A sad farewell
Message-ID: <20201105174127.GF1750809@mit.edu>
References: <b0ca070f-dd1f-1b8d-940c-7e4c57ea8393@cisco.com> <5fa3ffbe.1c69fb81.a621e.78ba@mx.google.com> <MN2PR15MB3103C6573396210E2CA7274D97EE0@MN2PR15MB3103.namprd15.prod.outlook.com> <E971F6B0-EFF1-4E1D-8CCB-80FA7FEB722D@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <E971F6B0-EFF1-4E1D-8CCB-80FA7FEB722D@gmail.com>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/nzIqWd3CMIvi3fiaykzppUelpNk>
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: Thu, 05 Nov 2020 17:41:33 -0000

On Thu, Nov 05, 2020 at 02:32:30PM +0000, Stewart Bryant wrote:
> I am also concerned about what I am seeing here, and also remember
> the departure of the RFC Editor.
> 
> I no longer understand the IETF commercial governance structure and
> its oversight mechanism, but I have a feeling that a board of
> respected neutral parties needs to be convened to conduct a review
> and report their findings.

Agreed.  I'd also suggest that while it's easy to lay the blame at the
feet of certain individuals and their perceived failings "to care for
the community", it's also a good idea to take a look at the *systems*
that are in place, and whether there is something about the
structures, or what various RFC's or other documents may have caused
individuals to assume that they were *supposed* to have to have taken
a more corporate, "professional", attitude which ended up treating
members of the community as cogs in a machine....

I wonder if perhaps this was an unintended side effect of trying to
make the IETF "all growned up" and more of a "professional standards
body" ala ISO....

	       		    	    - Ted