Re: [Rfced-future] Model proposal

Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> Tue, 07 July 2020 23:37 UTC

Return-Path: <ekr@rtfm.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 D73063A0C32 for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 16:37:53 -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, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=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=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 1kgZkQL4qeZU for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 16:37:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lf1-x133.google.com (mail-lf1-x133.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::133]) (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 E1C613A0C30 for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Tue, 7 Jul 2020 16:37:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-lf1-x133.google.com with SMTP id o4so25830845lfi.7 for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 16:37:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=qvLu3RSF1R7sJDtL+ld4yyH/IBnjdBfowqARVU33Q74=; b=fbhQnwTNExReJcCqdoVhKkisFRHYebocJQpXhbVeU+suOwQYv+g235X80Hr0aE5+nl DluSQ8EeN2SEouCApVKmonV3B9HMneEZ8rleR20gF0WKcCxCnWHY4Vnz/QT8yGvn0f21 BW71sdfuqvEykVGGwTBXRpjYHmwDJdp7aS6U4qCLzYl+NHnQMOhHpNuWBGyRLBRCo3/W 1JqpjI2x1aHAGRD9mXxD8JH5RxtrskFATXlQDa50+7r24anAYkdvgP2bVFT/FDTouNTp I7U5461P21FwU5eh1QSJerm1q8P9825l6UVJpRXwsYZXnPjesOxQB8UHm3hpSFkc+D9O 28+Q==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qvLu3RSF1R7sJDtL+ld4yyH/IBnjdBfowqARVU33Q74=; b=qfA1cagF6B4D/VZWLj150mOcq9o47CP/Oah7PeHzSWBLrqk6hvbM9W/bRr+444ORWY r5gPeCBKgQChnnbIaXjaLofq+/LXgpG1spmNFzhwQQXIBpYikav6eEufM9dTPT061Yy3 9lFHxRuAORPth2JyYuh/CVXwYY4k12+cZaiOIZK1hvfLX2Okdt68BNKQVAHOZ2DyAWey 3HICxj950KKv3WZuhoH3QT4+46zP4ev8P9pB6fl5ESPOonoltR4BfEbqPeR2M7nQC35y BZ0+uHtSAuZJLIYsiuwLSd2GpxGOT6BV09PZkY4L0RCn9KuYCoRCeiu85dwM2Tvc8zr3 ZotA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530ubhhxWavWLY/OPEikvCEbIU7lI6EYZ3RR7JbGjalKLey1n/k+ xVK7whkhXhB0KE4tZHsWdakzVSl6HZ4JqBgAHzkFxpP6qr0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzSv2PcB9onmbWmd0cpF+j2nd8Kehq8e6QTFJ9u4fWxhFJfq6BWv8lZc5TKOPpl2s5FFir1hV1Z5/fskkk1GuA=
X-Received: by 2002:ac2:4c2a:: with SMTP id u10mr33874035lfq.168.1594165069928; Tue, 07 Jul 2020 16:37:49 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <d4d1cd2d-6df2-4cb4-b63a-f9bba45b48c0@www.fastmail.com> <51b72823-f2a2-29bd-bd88-f63e13522387@gmail.com> <d1f33279-0656-4caa-81e7-aa665d3a4acb@www.fastmail.com> <CABcZeBMdrfjy+kqQ20MS_1fZrNddff+ycwau5VdC5qAFQN2qVA@mail.gmail.com> <20200707174930.GP3100@localhost> <CABcZeBMGxE6+29_BfNEANjZVJ=0UKFYM+pCp_ECsDw6e2aFMwQ@mail.gmail.com> <37d1d244-ae3f-26db-11c7-d4fcfd25a747@gmail.com> <CABcZeBML64rxVC_wmrDoEbkgVu0+6w=4AoQhz-Pg+OiMwEK+9A@mail.gmail.com> <398cb364-1592-f63e-da02-45b08baf1c00@joelhalpern.com>
In-Reply-To: <398cb364-1592-f63e-da02-45b08baf1c00@joelhalpern.com>
From: Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 2020 16:37:13 -0700
Message-ID: <CABcZeBPfOkrnpZh4X+XZOaoGb8ATC9PYaTp9T4cn5GR=SgwGwg@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Cc: rfced-future@iab.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000b50cb205a9e27a72"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfced-future/W1-TS7gktMl1FlfbW1aRZ14XUvI>
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: Tue, 07 Jul 2020 23:37:54 -0000

On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 4:14 PM Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrote:

> We keep a lawyer on retainer.
> So the difference becomes that we are looking for someone who will be
> - more engaged in understanding and helping direct the community (the
> lawyers explicit do not direct)
> - have more ongoing activities, although quite possibly less than
> heretofore
>


Well, I'm not sure about the "we" here, as I'm arguing that we should not
in fact be looking for this.

Rather, I am arguing that the community should drive strategy (potentially
with some structure like Martin proposed) and that to the extent to which
we need someone with specific expertise in the areas Brian has flagged, we
should hire someone to advise us, in much the same way we do for legal
advice.

-Ekr

Sounds like you are actually arguing for a senior, respected,
> contractor.  With a long term relationship.
>
> Yours,
> Joel
>
> On 7/7/2020 6:18 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 3:11 PM Brian E Carpenter
> > <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com <mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>>
> wrote:
> >
> >      > Sorry, I should have been more clear. I think this is a proper
> >     subject for IESG and IAB consideration, made somewhat more difficult
> >     by anchoring on a historical five author limit that had (at least to
> >     me) a fairly unclear rationale.
> >
> >     Absolutely I think that community discussion and rough consensus is
> >     appropriate for this and other strategy or policy issues. My concern
> >     is that this needs to be facilitated and informed by someone with
> >     relevant knowledge and experience in the
> >     editing/publishing/library/archival world and that is not us.
> >
> >
> > Stipulating for the moment that this is true, I don't really see how you
> > get from there to "and this person needs to be in charge of the
> > process". To give an example that I think I also gave on the most recent
> > virtual call, we often have to do things that require a bunch of
> > relevant expertise in the legal world, and that's not us, but address
> > that problem by engaging a lawyer and asking their opinion. Why doesn't
> > that work here?
> >
> > -Ekr
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>