Re: [Rfced-future] Model proposal

Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Fri, 10 July 2020 14:14 UTC

Return-Path: <housley@vigilsec.com>
X-Original-To: rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCEE53A0D2E for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 07:14:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 HtgqnGqoBf9J for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 07:14:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.smeinc.net (mail.smeinc.net [209.135.209.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 771043A0D22 for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 07:14:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5022300B24 for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 10:14:30 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mail.smeinc.net
Received: from mail.smeinc.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.smeinc.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id kwCHdHc8C88O for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 10:14:29 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from a860b60074bd.fios-router.home (pool-72-66-113-56.washdc.fios.verizon.net [72.66.113.56]) by mail.smeinc.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1A532300464; Fri, 10 Jul 2020 10:14:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Message-Id: <DE2B2759-03FF-4D2C-B765-3C7C9AFA0955@vigilsec.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_D45E6DAF-7B75-45C3-A8B3-0092A8258AF0"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.14\))
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 10:14:29 -0400
In-Reply-To: <F30FBA82-510C-4DC1-8535-FFA30345CEA7@kuehlewind.net>
Cc: rfced-future@iab.org
To: Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>
References: <d4d1cd2d-6df2-4cb4-b63a-f9bba45b48c0@www.fastmail.com> <51b72823-f2a2-29bd-bd88-f63e13522387@gmail.com> <d1f33279-0656-4caa-81e7-aa665d3a4acb@www.fastmail.com> <098fb5bf-f65c-d741-5fa7-baa6ae2c8358@nostrum.com> <F30FBA82-510C-4DC1-8535-FFA30345CEA7@kuehlewind.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.14)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfced-future/-1Yqbkfs6eECB-6L0qWu7g--RvE>
Subject: Re: [Rfced-future] Model proposal
X-BeenThere: rfced-future@iab.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Editor Future Development Program <rfced-future.iab.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/options/rfced-future>, <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rfced-future/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfced-future@iab.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/rfced-future>, <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2020 14:14:37 -0000

Martin proposed:

> Concretely, this proposes forming a RFC Series Evolution program of the IAB that uses the auspices of an IAB program, one that closely follows the model proposed in [RSEME <https://martinthomson.github.io/rfced-model/draft-thomson-rfced-model.html#RSEME>]. This results in a group that follows [WG <https://martinthomson.github.io/rfced-model/draft-thomson-rfced-model.html#WG>] procedures, with the exception that the functions performed by the IESG are instead performed by the IAB. In particular, selection of chairs and appeals regarding the execution of the process are directed to the IAB to resolve.


In an IETF WG, the appeals chain is:

   WG Chair --> Area Director --> IESG --> IAB --> ISOC Board

I think this proposal is saying that for this activity, it is:

   Program Chair --> IAB --> ISOC Board

Is every decision appealed to the IAB possible to escalate to the  ISOC Board?  Usually, disputes can only be escelated to the ISOC Board that claim that Internet standards procedures were not followed.  However, the appeals chain is quite short here, and ir is unclear to me that the Internet standards procedures applies to IAB programs.

Russ