Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals
Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Mon, 29 June 2020 02:01 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 D47763A1026 for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 28 Jun 2020 19:01:03 -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 ZestVnBpNJcw for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 28 Jun 2020 19:01:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pl1-x630.google.com (mail-pl1-x630.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::630]) (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 44E303A1025 for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Sun, 28 Jun 2020 19:01:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pl1-x630.google.com with SMTP id g17so6462258plq.12 for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Sun, 28 Jun 2020 19:01:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=AgmWZMlxtcZBlqFbfmiT4roqPf1iNsi4Br/THkAcxjU=; b=munIlhT0fLntZLyPcJ5h6isN4S/jaRseGwjsn8sPJ0fPoFP8DDvTHCMXq1DHzheXwJ OQdHFw5vCeKp4F2slgEPn2QWxDVdrh1n9MUbaQi+JTD0QpbVChC7VMZ9Enjl7NldNlD5 11H0Z5reH9351wajI2GLMktqr6DnnMry+w6nH4C597x4vOT9QfI+/K4NdBwy+IgygEo3 YoHVOivUxg0WTODB+pnV6XCKSzzTKX+dpe3vjX93Aw3tQXZLALRWugd/QATmE0qxuMgN G85SCNbmOohLVd5U2GDgp/I3kwyWIKqC0ManJAZwcIi59ZI9SpFvPy/EmG0JVduC2zHO AoFA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=AgmWZMlxtcZBlqFbfmiT4roqPf1iNsi4Br/THkAcxjU=; b=XheY4e+vI7U8GiiYVUvx4nL4QowfR429NURQsk6yIpp25qeRfUOc98q/T7F+iXnptE GJpVo+X/nJAJm0U9PV5VCKXVaPjs9SKIrlz7kgOLHZRse1pKfDfrk2DePw9c3F5Ydt26 QHJNdjIZyg5m1lc2Yj5/TV8t+YmA8Jw66FNi0kk4MbWyGTIkSCW3as/d6uQ2gBhR9yjn XRR/9sqROOQk/kLNSGX2LeSD7GGMGWoZ2LqanJZknSA69ZcFismJvrHN+3t1RATUI0co oAasxO0d8OP8kjQISqtAjNB8zCRsxGxmzLu54cOy3Hi4H/fnMkECZvz6GGojakM1cOww /cxA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533mj5UcV7F+DVO24pbRG42ov3MpiBTfDxeH2T36rxu/0l2bHgQX VAj9EzSYPAVeFfjpWaHeBtkvxRlt2k4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxGuY09ycLFrjJSQ9ayTrR52e/8bui73NxAxHKHxY75vYzmLl8PLinll6kjwiIyM5SKD/ym/A==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:488:: with SMTP id bh8mr12683008pjb.49.1593396060303; Sun, 28 Jun 2020 19:01:00 -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 m14sm28120286pgt.6.2020.06.28.19.00.58 for <rfced-future@iab.org> (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sun, 28 Jun 2020 19:00:59 -0700 (PDT)
To: 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> <cfd9512d-b61e-4438-9ce3-102f6ddaebe7@www.fastmail.com> <befe8914-996a-d4f0-f9ef-cc49d882839c@joelhalpern.com> <dc41e1eb-35c6-b678-65e2-db638f330018@nthpermutation.com> <3EDDC9C7-BA91-4E18-AB1C-8E77E95627B2@mnot.net>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <065dd700-9666-6c88-5016-0668ed966884@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2020 14:00:55 +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: <3EDDC9C7-BA91-4E18-AB1C-8E77E95627B2@mnot.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfced-future/_By_CbQVjf4xtgcQxULJmB_ZNmU>
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: Mon, 29 Jun 2020 02:01:04 -0000
On 29-Jun-20 12:23, Mark Nottingham wrote: > The suggestion was to have more than one more specialised role, not to promote 'leadership by committee.' This has been discussed a number of times previously, due to the very high bar created by the combination of requirements we current place on the position (as Martin mentioned). Certainly splitting the IT project management role (a.k.a. xml2rfcv3) from the Series Editor role is very desirable. A no-brainer, in fact. But anyone with experience (even as an author) with journal publishing knows that the role of an Editor, aided by an editorial board, is essential. If we want the RFC Series to be more than a copy shop, we need such a person. The board may well be small, as Nevil suggests, but part of its role is to consult the community. We have lots of running code proof that the community on its own doesn't produce consensus; we need some focus point to extract a consensus, and the editorial board seems like a good solution for that. Regards Brian > > >> On 29 Jun 2020, at 10:14 am, Michael StJohns <msj@nthpermutation.com> wrote: >> >> On 6/28/2020 7:50 PM, Joel M. Halpern wrote: >>> In my view, the reason we need a person to do this is that leadership by committee is essential equivalent to a recipe for disaster. And I do think we want leadership. >>> >>> Yours, >>> joel >> Strong +1 here. One of the reasons for having a senior person in this role is so that the attention paid to the strategic evolution of the series does not wax and wane based on the current hobbyhorses of the leadership or their companies, or upon other loud voices. I have no problems with those voices influencing strategy, but I have strong problems with those voices directing strategy - especially if they change directions every 6 months or a year. >> >> We've had at least 4 people with the "rare and difficult" [Aside: difficult?] combination of attributes so I'm not sure where Martin is coming from here. It may be that he doesn't agree that those are the right attributes for the role, but that's a whole other discussion. I would expect with some luck, and with an IETF that respects what an expert can bring to the role, we will be able to find someone who won't run screaming into the night after they meet us. >> >> Mike >> >> >> >>> On 6/28/2020 7:47 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: >>>> On Sat, Jun 27, 2020, at 13:01, Nevil Brownlee wrote: >>>>> 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 >>>> >>>> This is very much not what I had in mind. We should not insist on having a role that depends on finding an individual with a rare and difficult combination of attributes. And I don't think that you can support that function by taking a program with open participation and consensus processes and reduce that to 5 people (+stream manager ex officio) who are responsible for approving strategy. >>>> >>>> Perhaps you can start by explaining why you think we need to have an individual perform these functions. >>>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Rfced-future mailing list >> Rfced-future@iab.org >> https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/rfced-future > > -- > Mark Nottingham https://www.mnot.net/ >
- [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Brian Rosen
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Michael StJohns
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Eliot Lear
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Bob Hinden
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Christian Huitema
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Bron Gondwana
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Bron Gondwana
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Michael StJohns
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Wes Hardaker
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals John Levine
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Stephen Farrell
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Jay Daley
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Ted Lemon
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals S Moonesamy
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Martin Thomson
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Brian Rosen
- [Rfced-future] "oversees" [was Scope and IETF 108… Brian E Carpenter
- [Rfced-future] hiring [Scope and IETF 108 proposa… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] "oversees" [was Scope and IETF… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Martin Thomson
- Re: [Rfced-future] "oversees" [was Scope and IETF… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Colin Perkins
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Eliot Lear
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Colin Perkins
- Re: [Rfced-future] "oversees" [was Scope and IETF… S Moonesamy
- [Rfced-future] Publication vetos [Scope and IETF … Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] "oversees" [was Scope and IETF… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Publication vetos [Scope and I… Lars Eggert
- Re: [Rfced-future] Publication vetos [Scope and I… Russ Housley
- Re: [Rfced-future] Publication vetos [Scope and I… Russ Housley
- Re: [Rfced-future] Publication vetos [Scope and I… Lars Eggert
- Re: [Rfced-future] Publication vetos [Scope and I… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Publication vetos [Scope and I… Russ Housley
- Re: [Rfced-future] Publication vetos [Scope and I… Scott O. Bradner
- Re: [Rfced-future] Publication vetos [Scope and I… Larry Masinter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Nevil Brownlee
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Martin Thomson
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Michael StJohns
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Mark Nottingham
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Martin Thomson
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Mark Nottingham
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Jay Daley
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals John Levine
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Christian Huitema
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals S Moonesamy
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals S Moonesamy
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Christopher Wood
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Eliot Lear
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals John Levine
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Larry Masinter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals John R. Levine
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Mark Nottingham
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] "oversees" [was Scope and IETF… Nico Williams
- Re: [Rfced-future] "oversees" [was Scope and IETF… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] "oversees" [was Scope and IETF… Jay Daley
- Re: [Rfced-future] "oversees" [was Scope and IETF… Nico Williams
- Re: [Rfced-future] "oversees" [was Scope and IETF… Christian Huitema
- Re: [Rfced-future] "oversees" [was Scope and IETF… Michael StJohns
- Re: [Rfced-future] "oversees" [was Scope and IETF… Christian Huitema
- Re: [Rfced-future] "oversees" [was Scope and IETF… Nico Williams
- Re: [Rfced-future] "oversees" [was Scope and IETF… Nico Williams
- Re: [Rfced-future] "oversees" [was Scope and IETF… Christian Huitema
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Eliot Lear
- Re: [Rfced-future] "oversees" [was Scope and IETF… S Moonesamy
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rfced-future] "oversees" [was Scope and IETF… Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Eliot Lear
- Re: [Rfced-future] "oversees" [was Scope and IETF… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Mark Nottingham
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Martin Thomson
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Martin Thomson
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Eliot Lear
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Brian Rosen
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Ted Lemon
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Ted Lemon
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Eliot Lear
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Ted Lemon
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Christian Huitema
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rfced-future] Standing behind the RPC (was: … Adrian Farrel
- [Rfced-future] Standing behind the RPC (was: Scop… Jay Daley
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals John Levine
- Re: [Rfced-future] Standing behind the RPC Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Standing behind the RPC (was: … Jay Daley
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Larry Masinter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Scope and IETF 108 proposals Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Standing behind the RPC (was: … Eliot Lear
- Re: [Rfced-future] Standing behind the RPC (was: … Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Rfced-future] Standing behind the RPC (was: … Eliot Lear
- Re: [Rfced-future] Standing behind the RPC (was: … Adrian Farrel
- Re: [Rfced-future] Standing behind the RPC (was: … John Levine
- Re: [Rfced-future] Standing behind the RPC Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] Standing behind the RPC Martin Thomson
- Re: [Rfced-future] Standing behind the RPC Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rfced-future] Standing behind the RPC Michael StJohns
- Re: [Rfced-future] Standing behind the RPC Eric Rescorla
- Re: [Rfced-future] Standing behind the RPC Jay Daley
- Re: [Rfced-future] Standing behind the RPC Brian E Carpenter