IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rfced-future] Filling the RSCE position (was: Re: Comments on -07)

Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org> Mon, 03 January 2022 18:04 UTC

Return-Path: <lars@eggert.org>
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 D0E6D3A064F for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Jan 2022 10:04:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=eggert.org
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 6cMK9BwfigzA for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Jan 2022 10:04:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.eggert.org (mail.eggert.org [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:211:32ff:fe22:186f]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 90D8A3A064B for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Mon, 3 Jan 2022 10:04:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (unknown [IPv6:2a00:ac00:4000:400:9455:5e97:5df3:fdf9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.eggert.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 440E21D2204; Mon, 3 Jan 2022 20:04:35 +0200 (EET)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=eggert.org; s=dkim; t=1641233075; bh=G/62wmqGS6p+ttlooGY4HlA5O3lweOZ/K/zsPkOWDSs=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=mLJFTfTkdfe3CAy6qAJ2Xq1Z5/s0cQjkjj1xOI0hFuw4hN7VW72BDZ9rPEGTnJzvA rRt7GY9/RVJ8JVWfxvnKZvWFoH3JwXF5zRv3In1zdwdfw+4lKG0w3Nsemj8gRs2Gwd pr4d0QqcbX/Nan/wBFzSYhKopq3Vil8phZwtVNG0=
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_FA50631B-9763-40C8-8C4A-58792BA9CEBE"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.40.0.1.81\))
From: Lars Eggert <lars@eggert.org>
In-Reply-To: <2939BCCA4CA75D29739F59D4@PSB>
Date: Mon, 03 Jan 2022 20:04:32 +0200
Cc: Mirja Kühlewind <ietf@kuehlewind.net>, Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch>, rfced-future@iab.org, Jay Daley <exec-director@ietf.org>, Michael StJohns <msj@nthpermutation.com>
Message-Id: <B391917D-247E-43A2-B0E5-4FBCE22E7765@eggert.org>
References: <F0016CA1725A561034951054@PSB> <7D28CA5F-594B-4212-9155-86669654A504@ietf.org> <A1A5EDBA-7598-4E74-ACEE-B7A39A8010F5@kuehlewind.net> <de858e02-a6ff-613b-3d2c-db85d5ea42b1@lear.ch> <CAFB3EA8-11D9-4D55-924A-B66294309869@kuehlewind.net> <2939BCCA4CA75D29739F59D4@PSB>
To: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
X-MailScanner-ID: 440E21D2204.AFFFB
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
X-MailScanner-From: lars@eggert.org
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfced-future/4iIxfUpnuEEtzkGF9wdAshb32Qc>
Subject: Re: [Rfced-future] Filling the RSCE position (was: Re: Comments on -07)
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: Mon, 03 Jan 2022 18:04:54 -0000

Hi,

On 2022-1-3, at 18:33, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> wrote:
> At least as I understand "decision", they can (and have)
> delegated (at least many of) those. That is actually reasonable
> and appropriate: If the ED needed to get Board review prior to
> making every decision and acting on it, the result would be
> complete paralysis.

for context, please see https://www.ietf.org/media/documents/IETF_LLC_Delegated_Authorities_2020-06-11.pdf (linked from https://www.ietf.org/about/administration/policies-procedures/), which has the details about board-to-ED delegations.

Thanks,
Lars

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email