Re: [Rfced-future] Document for IAB consideration: draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfc-model-11

Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch> Wed, 02 February 2022 19:34 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 B836E3A1D3F for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Feb 2022 11:34:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.803
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.803 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.714, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) 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 dLEeoPPfis9l for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 2 Feb 2022 11:34:16 -0800 (PST)
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 EA5833A1D12 for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Wed, 2 Feb 2022 11:34:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [IPV6:2001:420:c0c0:1011::7] ([IPv6:2001:420:c0c0:1011:0:0:0:7]) (authenticated bits=0) by upstairs.ofcourseimright.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-18) with ESMTPSA id 212JYBBn430239 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 2 Feb 2022 20:34:12 +0100
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=1643830453; bh=AJFvvMELEF3OGF116CyNOOnjQ0nqTOQ3ZyDz2bupe3s=; h=Date:To:References:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:From; b=ZY4j+nGIIV3Xwqnxi3MPEsGCP2CFiWzKsvoK8Yoy29Noar1c1cMNBJuUMuVk1KuO5 eOvlrvPvKZsIV26kzsCgBhgltxMqjveBaDlCzUUoGgc3J5w6i9Cng9X7ThKqy5TREA kWrPwARapWY72Rc+a8peGiWdgLOWOPM35uzSKvgw=
Message-ID: <da91f355-1a18-dc3f-3da4-2acf253e3bea@lear.ch>
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2022 20:34:08 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.1
Content-Language: en-US
To: Michael StJohns <msj@nthpermutation.com>, rfced-future@iab.org
References: <410918e0-1898-309f-3289-a02d30a112b3@lear.ch> <26953c41-db43-0c3f-4a5d-d95a99fe4844@nthpermutation.com>
From: Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch>
In-Reply-To: <26953c41-db43-0c3f-4a5d-d95a99fe4844@nthpermutation.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------DZQEDjaPmLugLy2KRdAv0Ie1"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfced-future/_B_ny4OPXKYaS3dLu6iwLsxE2gE>
Subject: Re: [Rfced-future] Document for IAB consideration: draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfc-model-11
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, 02 Feb 2022 19:34:28 -0000

Hi Mike,

I presented the process that I expect to have happen back in the Fall 
(you may recall a detailed timeline slide - it's in the materials).  
This is an IAB stream document.  That means that RFC 4845 governs, and 
as I mentioned in the Fall, it's up to the board, not the program, to 
decide in the end how to weigh community input.  It has been my 
consistent advice that the board broadly consult, including the IETF, 
IRTF, and others, because, in my view, this program believes that's the 
right thing to do (I don't disagree).  The IESG will have to approve 
changes to the IAB charter, 2028, and a slight tweak to 2026.

Eliot



On 02.02.22 19:01, Michael StJohns wrote:
> On 2/2/2022 3:51 AM, Eliot Lear wrote:
>> Dear Board Members,
>>
>> The chairs of the RFC Editor Future Development Program believe that 
>> draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfc-model-11[1] is ready for you to progress.  
>> Given the nature of this work, we suggest that during the community 
>> comment period you seek broad review.  We await any comments or 
>> questions you or the community might have for us.
>>
>> As a reminder, the final version of this draft should be published 
>> concurrently with draft-carpenter-rfced-iab-charter, 
>> draft-rosen-rfcefdp-update-2026-01, and draft-rsalz-2028bis-03.txt.  
>> These updates are scoped to reflect the change of structure.
>>
>> Brian & Eliot
>>
>> [1] 
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model-11
>>
>>
>>
> Deleting the IAB for a minute.  Shouldn't this note also be directed 
> to the IESG and the LLC Board?  I believe we were in agreement that it 
> will require approval of all three groups to go forward with the 
> approval of this document.
>
> Mike
>
>