IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rfced-future] Consensus check: Issue 22 – new stream for RFC Editor

Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch> Wed, 23 June 2021 19:43 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@lear.ch>
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 9395D3A0E00 for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Jun 2021 12:43:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.228
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.228 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.338, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (1024-bit key) reason="fail (message has been altered)" header.d=lear.ch
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 rqm63WzYwj27 for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 23 Jun 2021 12:43:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from upstairs.ofcourseimright.com (upstairs.ofcourseimright.com [185.32.222.29]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68DA83A0DFB for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Wed, 23 Jun 2021 12:43:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Lear-Air.local ([IPv6:2a02:aa15:4101:2a80:e06b:c14b:ed19:6b55]) (authenticated bits=0) by upstairs.ofcourseimright.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-18) with ESMTPSA id 15NJhaDT451885 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 23 Jun 2021 21:43:36 +0200
Authentication-Results: upstairs.ofcourseimright.com; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lear.ch
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=lear.ch; s=upstairs; t=1624477417; bh=iI2VshMSKqWEzv956/vnLlqJcFfsa9Wt6+e+ezkfLa4=; h=To:References:From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=wEA6xG6YcidVheFZD+kcQYOKq5AANSVPUf4AUVhMOeLdkxImXMImTvuJmahuIuktc Rozuzr6vK0SBWaqeb2EI+4iBMgfnisMAzCdm+YYoXFpPdbD3vujgfFb2lqYZEtg2Nn 57xGnWiC7kkaDePHXpylFrQKteZIo6XSaWKu7xYU=
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>, Michael StJohns <msj@nthpermutation.com>, rfced-future@iab.org
References: <7ef10df2-cb21-a95b-b977-286b6d8a8405@lear.ch> <0a8101d76788$0e1af5a0$2a50e0e0$@olddog.co.uk> <fdb50b3a-a0e1-1421-4a4f-733002cfccda@lear.ch> <0ace01d767a5$39001350$ab0039f0$@olddog.co.uk> <7bda1df1-307b-4370-ad94-71af09af12c4@www.fastmail.com> <47618d03-3136-a4db-cd5b-66a1e89216ac@gmail.com> <492d7b65-33b9-e749-3297-85fe6779531c@nthpermutation.com> <16ab1107-6e4c-aaa4-80ef-7675ca05b13a@gmail.com>
From: Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch>
Message-ID: <a5715a35-5687-621e-e099-c6bda47c698e@lear.ch>
Date: Wed, 23 Jun 2021 21:43:31 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <16ab1107-6e4c-aaa4-80ef-7675ca05b13a@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="a4xOSVD6ZLg2Jdrjbrh5gCqBl8naGVzJk"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfced-future/WAIk1Z0XQngUSx5F8tr9C8YX8zE>
Subject: Re: [Rfced-future] Consensus check: Issue 22 – new stream for RFC Editor
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: Wed, 23 Jun 2021 19:43:47 -0000

As a matter of history:

On 23.06.21 02:22, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> The IAB charter is an IETF BCP, so it can only be updated by an
> IETF standards action. It can practically be a one line document
> except for boilerplate, but it's gonna have to be done.

My personal view: I don't think we should let the tail wag the dog, nor 
block this work on a new charter for the IAB.  This document could just 
as easily be processed as a BCP; the only issue being that the IESG 
would have to approve it.  If we want, we can get both IAB and IESG 
assent.  That has been previously done for RFC 7979.

It'd require that an IESG member, presumably the chair, sponsor the doc, 
and that it go through IETF last call and IESG evaluation.  If the IESG 
is unwilling to do this, we could revisit the matter.

Eliot

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email