IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Sat, 27 June 2020 04:22 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.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 2388F3A0B99 for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 21:22:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 eDYVc0gYcir2 for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 21:22:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-x636.google.com (mail-pl1-x636.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::636]) (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 9C90D3A0B96 for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 21:22:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-x636.google.com with SMTP id d12so5045582ply.1 for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 21:22:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Ma07yGd2jq4+g4VRxrRKssYwwbfTo9R1QJcJZYaMMI0=; b=cl3cGSUhlxaMsCtEC+PSYpifR41B5DtKS+lClXvwOx8E2Scx/iQWWaZ/Czr3gVbklT jYRaM/rnY9qQ9CnjZQsKGviUSl6mzi9lY+hh4dZkTOiI/bgQSpQHqe7/TVR5oBVzKW6p Lfq4wBk2KgyT0IaNVXvlauDuE/ANs382obv7SeR8Mb7MrJrlvaSswcXPKY5pxdJfeAw0 NXUXrPJsT0aKGmrVEFj8NhhpMe/2nU5OLxtYYrBZfLCKGbvx9B23ZAGNBIzMKIuiwtHu FmMlE6dVOom4/HbXeBUrFzlg6Oe0A3/fL6CLVEoUywFXko+mSOPREoAJRoabgi7hOk1q AkaA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=Ma07yGd2jq4+g4VRxrRKssYwwbfTo9R1QJcJZYaMMI0=; b=DC+DSSPpuZ0CW3RM7ZNlsiG/S2kfD51d7QnnYW53By/6ZogLUSImo3w1c8+o356XXM 5d7R/a7TMv+i2odh0iDB1B9ssH0zS90jdfrg8cVUhNeyG8Vlf8QRhPbLtsiD1hfAaYAp CHKkWCJ80vdpwwmZ0tKUf6JzHCvG21DVDjHPCr9rcNoS61dkNHnWi+MQzduM5t41vAgB O/Rb3W/Vb2sZQA+y0BCFVZQKVWkggt2+MaqyziG1tLkEUjP12jnn+zsA102OEQ8nYz5w wxNqRc11m8UKv+3sTaa7mXgyemTIPBOoUCOsHSahigjyClWKfGbMADStTICtsJhPixU+ t4jg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533CJkJpHIqNpVUAZqbEah9ZOrf8zi/6tfimSSKAjOgIWRTsfT+k xozfaSMlvVcqCT8JDlerML3Y+aycH40=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyqiutlU7iq9VZWZ1eYEPn/Agd8KibLT0+MsIkVbW6LO7Y87ETTPqfrL4EsrhknKnBuMqLYzA==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:724a:: with SMTP id c10mr4915119pll.143.1593231748794; Fri, 26 Jun 2020 21:22:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.178.20] (203.90.69.111.dynamic.snap.net.nz. [111.69.90.203]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d5sm12183783pfa.71.2020.06.26.21.22.26 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 26 Jun 2020 21:22:28 -0700 (PDT)
To: Nevil Brownlee <nevil.brownlee@gmail.com>, Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net>
Cc: rfced-future@iab.org
References: <62A4C70D-419A-4DE3-8A54-60EB2B064EF2@brianrosen.net> <8c626e3e-1700-46fe-90b3-26b9c1296788@www.fastmail.com> <1b6cf5e6-2c16-d839-08dd-d005d4fdbc60@gmail.com> <3678427d-6496-45c7-bd1b-14d7f860c971@www.fastmail.com> <CACOFP=iAzB+hrtZcu4yaDv9mpmxSybGTc-cugWC2Hv==-zTTdg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f8192d5d-9327-651f-c2f0-c8ce7f978a2d@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2020 16:22:24 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CACOFP=iAzB+hrtZcu4yaDv9mpmxSybGTc-cugWC2Hv==-zTTdg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfced-future/CXcW1eOuawlJIYdCCW4VQg2IOQY>
Subject: Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals
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: Sat, 27 Jun 2020 04:22:31 -0000

Hi Nevil, I noticed a few places where you typed "RSEB" instead of "RSAB". Apart from that I'm in general agreement with the proposal.

Maybe it's too specific to define the community discussion venue as "the rfc-interest list". For the breadth of community the RSAB would need to reach, other methods of discussion may also be needed.

Regards
   Brian

On 27-Jun-20 15:01, Nevil Brownlee wrote:
> Hi Martin:
> I've updated my Internet Draft to include a suggestion of what an RSEB (RFC Series Editorial Board) could be structured.  Take a look at https://www.ietf.org/id/draft-brownlee-rfc-series-and-rse-changes-01.html
> 
> Of course, any suggestions for changes/improvements/etc to that draft are welcome :-)
> 
> Cheers, Nevil
> 
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 11:43 AM Martin Thomson <mt@lowentropy.net <mailto:mt@lowentropy.net>> wrote:
> 
>     On Thu, Jun 25, 2020, at 07:09, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>     > On 24-Jun-20 19:54, Martin Thomson wrote:
>     > > We don't need a single person (or contracted entity, if that includes more than one person) to be given the task of determining strategy..  If we need a strategy to serve our community, then maybe that community should setting and owning that strategy.  Not indirectly, via an appointed custodian, but directly.
>     >
>     > I don't understand how that would work in the absence of a group and a
>     > group leader to determine what the community is (since it's not the
>     > IETF) and what the community's rough consensus is. Who would they be?
>     > In my book, the RSE and the RFC Series Board.
> 
>     I don't think that is necessarily the case.
> 
>     The process that we're following has the same requirements and challenges.  It has leadership.  Two leaders in fact, which is more than twice as good as relying on a single person.  It has open participation.  (I don't know what RFC Series Board is, but it implies a closed group, just as RSE implies an individual.)
> 
>     Speaking strictly about strategy, the structure of what we have here is just about as good as we will get in all the ways that matter.
> 
>     -- 
>     Rfced-future mailing list
>     Rfced-future@iab.org <mailto:Rfced-future@iab.org>
>     https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/rfced-future
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> -----------------------------------
> Nevil Brownlee, Taupo, NZ
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email