Re: Interim meetings - changing the way we work

Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> Thu, 05 March 2015 07:48 UTC

Return-Path: <bclaise@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 6BA5D1B2A22; Wed, 4 Mar 2015 23:48:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 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, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, 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 oSHNJMdkCSWj; Wed, 4 Mar 2015 23:48:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aer-iport-1.cisco.com (aer-iport-1.cisco.com [173.38.203.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C4D391B2A21; Wed, 4 Mar 2015 23:48:00 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=5201; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1425541681; x=1426751281; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=8UAa+BXF0RxTiYmQn8I4iJUENd8Bqrvvoc3l5VWwucY=; b=TK89Yg4RNf7C+wLEYHGOoeUsngRch8/ArdcRWCXtOVL6/cWxodizPjoc joFVnkaqZaAXohwWGvcOp5cCUpS3duYC/1fzo/LYTSWorn+v5WSh+xBVh FptDS3HKPTtUbOG9CX0QKtBt5go07ZxoRI041XNfMDWBpzCl4k8esJils U=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CIBQDtCPhU/xbLJq1ag1Ragwu+GIVxAoF0AQEBAQEBfIQQAQEEIxU2CgEQCxgCAgUWCwICCQMCAQIBDzYGDQEFAgEBiBcDEQ28b5UzDYU7AQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBEwSBIYlzgkSBSBEBUAeCaIFDBYRtji9MhCKBSIEagyaCMoZqhhAjggIcgVE9MQGBCoE4AQEB
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.11,345,1422921600"; d="scan'208";a="372054387"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-1.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 05 Mar 2015 07:47:59 +0000
Received: from [10.60.67.85] (ams-bclaise-8914.cisco.com [10.60.67.85]) by aer-core-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t257lwdP002839; Thu, 5 Mar 2015 07:47:58 GMT
Message-ID: <54F80A2E.3070804@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2015 08:47:58 +0100
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Andy Bierman <andy@yumaworks.com>
Subject: Re: Interim meetings - changing the way we work
References: <CAL0qLwZk=k-CWLte_ChK9f1kzLwMOTRyi7AwFa8fLjBsextBcA@mail.gmail.com> <54EEFCFB.7080107@cisco.com> <047F946E-3041-4510-8F78-D8D743C4FEED@nominum.com> <939B49536ECD5BFA17B5E5C4@JcK-HP8200.jck.com> <48DFF1A2-9BD0-4E08-B44A-704D5DCC278E@nominum.com> <54EF3644.7090808@joelhalpern.com> <02ED4331-9441-484C-96A6-70352C42ABBC@nominum.com> <54EF426A.9070706@joelhalpern.com> <31CF2C53-8168-4B2F-9E14-76FB44854813@nominum.com> <54EF7229.1030301@queuefull.net> <CAK3OfOh6BMP40y0H5Yny+n-8B8ayzgq4BeT2MmfF2XuxBBLk5A@mail.gmail.com> <54EF772C.5030309@queuefull.net> <519F10F3-0B24-4085-9294-8FFA10632CB3@lucidvision.com> <6BE1D8A6-C954-49C9-B0B8-D2D52DE212DC@lucidvision.com> <54EF9080.9050500@joelhalpern.com> <54EF9A36.4020905@labn.net> <528C98F9-5D16-4B5F-9B11-886C91B5FE59@lucidvision.com> <00b101d0529f$0c6ea580$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <54F4D4EC.4040600@cisco.com> <CABCOCHRqwtZU0R1ad=SDfcwixwR75RZ0g8Bw=t0BHbmHkSVkjQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABCOCHRqwtZU0R1ad=SDfcwixwR75RZ0g8Bw=t0BHbmHkSVkjQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/p4g0Rp159BSYkzSpnmhEkWfsZfo>
Cc: "netmod@ietf.org" <netmod@ietf.org>, 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: <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: Thu, 05 Mar 2015 07:48:03 -0000

On 05/03/2015 05:41, Andy Bierman wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> wrote:
>> On 27/02/2015 16:03, t.p. wrote:
> ....
>
>>> I see 'netmod' as a poster child for this with its issue list, state
>>> machine for issues and so on.  Even though I was tracking the list when
>>> the 'Ynn' issue list was created, I don't know where its state machine
>>> came from.  In recent minutes, I don't know what
>>> "  AB: I am not sure YANG 1.0 specifies C1 explicitly somewhere.
>>>     JS: Does A3 not follow from A2?
>>>     KW: A3 is more a corollary of A2.
>>>     AB: The high-level problem is how to create and maintain the
>>>         information needed to achieve A4. "
>>>
>>> is about; a brief search of mailing list and I-Ds gave me no explanation
>>> for A2 to C1.
>> And what about an email to the NETMOD mailing list, asking this question?
>> How is this any different than meeting minutes on a physical meeting, on
>> which you would have a question?
>>
>
> IMO Juergen does a very good job of recording the minutes of every
> NETMOD interim.
> Here is the header from those minutes (that were taken out of context):
>
> * YANG 1.1 Conformance
> ** https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bjorklund-yang-conformance-problem-00
>
> This clearly indicates that the notes are about the draft identified above.
> These identifiers A1, C2, etc. are in the draft.
>
> The NETMOD and NETCONF WGs have been extra careful about
> getting verification on the WG mailing list before proceeding with proposed
> changes that originate in VI meetings.
+100

Regards, Benoit
>
>
>> Regards, Benoit
>
> Andy
>
>
>>>
>>> And if a different group of engineers works on different topics, then
>>> they will likely, in the absence of any guidance, use different
>>> technology, different terminology and end up with a way of working that
>>> is as alien to the first group.
>>>
>>> As I said, changing the way we work.
>>>
>>> Tom Petch
>>> </tp>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --Tom
>>>
>>>
>>>> Lou
>>>>
>>>>> If you want a real example of how this can actually work, watch Anees
>>> explain how Open Config has done this with just weekly phone calls and a
>>> bunch of people typing on keyboards. They've done this in less than a
>>> year, and have rough consensus and (production) running code.  This is
>>> how the IETF used to operate: people got together, hacked code and got
>>> things working.  The goal was not having meetings, but producing code
>>> with rough consensus.
>>>>>
>>> https://code.facebook.com/posts/1421954598097990/networking-scale-recap
>>>>> --Tom
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yours,
>>>>>> Joel
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2/26/15 4:21 PM, Thomas D. Nadeau wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Feb 26, 2015:4:16 PM, at 4:16 PM, Brian E Carpenter
>>> <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 27/02/2015 09:08, Thomas D. Nadeau wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 26, 2015:2:42 PM, at 2:42 PM, Benson Schliesser
>>> <bensons@queuefull.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Nico Williams wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, but a record that a concall or other interim meeting took
>>> place,
>>>>>>>>>>> and who attended, even if there are incomplete or missing
>>> minutes, is
>>>>>>>>>>> important for IPR reasons.  Ensuring that such meetings are
>>> NOTE WELL
>>>>>>>>>>> meetings is (should be) a priority, and that includes ensuring
>>> that a
>>>>>>>>>>> record of that much exists.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ideally the concalls and other interims would be recorded.
>>>>>>>>>> I agree completely. My point was that meeting records (including
>>> minutes) will inevitably be incomplete, or possibly inaccurate, and that
>>> relying on the mailing list as an authoritative record is more
>>> effective.
>>>>>>>>>> Of course it is disappointing that we can't meaningfully
>>> translate voice discussions into text, in the minutes or in mailing list
>>> threads. If there were some magic tool e.g. that took better minutes
>>> then I'd be happy to use it. But otherwise, I think we just have to
>>> trust chairs to manage WG collaboration in whatever way is most
>>> effective for their WG's collaborators.
>>>>>>>>> The first step is to agree that an A/V recording is record
>>> enough.
>>>>>>>> It absolutely is not enough. Please see my previous message,
>>>>>>>> and the relevant rules in RFC 2418.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>    Brian
>>>>>>> You are missing my point. RFC or not, the IETF needs to evolve.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --Tom
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Perhaps having meetbot/txt notes that at a min include
>>> actions/decisions like we do in the issue tracker we've used for
>>> NETMOD's Yang 1.1's issues.
>>>>>>>>> --Tom
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> This will inevitably be suboptimal for some part of the
>>> population. (For instance, I've never been able to find an interim
>>> meeting time that fits the schedules of all attendees.) But if they (we)
>>> always revert to the mailing list for decision making then I suspect our
>>> work can remain open and transparent.
>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>>>>> -Benson
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> .
>>>
> .
>