Re: [Rfced-future] Moving forward: Please state your preference

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

> I've been trying to do a topological sort

That's exactly why I drew my Venn diagram...

Regards
   Brian Carpenter

On 20-Sep-20 05:13, Michael StJohns wrote:
> For the same reasons we discussed on the call, I choose option C - we're not ready to pick a path.   That looks closer to Option B than it does option A but probably actually isn't the same.  We've talked about common solution elements, but we're still having major discussions (cf John and and Adam's back and forth) about the implications of various choices such that picking solution elements are still quite difficult.  Among other things, many of the elements are entwined - e.g., choosing choice A of Group 1 may restrict your choices in Group 2 to choices C and F.
> 
> 
> As I read it we've agreed mostly on one thing:
> 
>   * That the stream managers will take a major role in the evolution process of the RFC Series.  
> 
> We seem to have also agreed that (I think this is what I got an agreement on from Martin and Brian when I asked the question on the call):
> 
>   * The LLC will be responsible for any contractual items including hiring/firing/renewals/day-to-day and that any delegation of that role will be only to a "fiduciary" of the LLC (e.g. employee or a contracted role) to specifically exclude the IAB/RSOC personnel management model.
> 
> We haven't agreed on:
> 
>   * Whether there will be a professional involved in the steering, or the model of engagement for that professional.  (e.g. employee or retained contractor with primary responsibility vs employee or retained contractor with advisory only responsibility or a professional contractor engaged only for task-specific short term items).
> 
>   * The model for publication of documents that drive the publication process.
> 
> And lots more.
> 
> I've been trying to do a topological sort and figure out which of the problems is the core one that we need to come to a conclusion on, and I'm at a loss.
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> 
> On 9/18/2020 11:55 AM, Eliot Lear wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>>
>> “When you come to a fork in the road, take it.”
>> — Yogi Bera
>>
>> The chairs have had an opportunity to discuss the last interim.  We note that some people liked the comparison chart, as a means to highlight both similarities and differences.   We know that some people would very much like to have seen a draft adopted, while others were not ready to move forward.  Several people would instead like to go issue by issue and resolve those issues before adopting a draft.  The chairs will leave this choice to the group as to which way to proceed at the moment.
>>
>> You are invited to specify your preference *on list* *by September 25th, 2:00pm GMT.  Option A or Option B.  Please be explicit.*
>>
>> We can pursue one of two approaches:
>>
>> *Option A:  Pursue adopting a draft*
>>
>> The approach would be that we *would* adopt a draft by IETF 109 – *as a starting point*.  To avoid further deadlocks, there would be *no* “I’m not ready” option in the hum.  Authors are invited to merge and indicate open issues in drafts.  Others are invited, if they really feel the need, to create new drafts within 2-3 weeks.  If there are more than two options, the chairs will find ways to wheedle things down to get to a draft to adopt, while being sensitive to the concerns EKR and others raised about inertia of what is in a draft.  If the group would like an interim to facilitate this option, the chairs will accommodate.
>>
>> *Option B: Pursue open issues one by one*
>>
>> Pursue issues one by one to resolve on list, starting with “Do people believe that the RSE position should continue in some form?”  We would pursue from the nature of the role if we get an affirmative answer.  Other questions would follow, such as aspects of oversight and relationship to RPC.
>>
>> If after the poll the group is evenly divided between these choices, in order to take the fork, the chairs will spin a spinner and make a decision.  You are encouraged to discuss these options, and may change your minds right up to the deadline.
>>
>> *A Plea*
>>
>> This program consists nearly exclusively of senior members of the community-  you are all past or current leaders of this organization with deep experience and knowledge.  We therefore hope that you will seek to find common ground with one another when you see a deadlock in view.
>>
>> Brian and Eliot
>>
>>
> 
>