Re: [Rfced-future] Moving forward: Please state your preference

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

Before answering that, I wanted to better understand the discrepancies between the models. Loosely based on Eliot's charts, I built the attached Venn diagram. It's quite subjective, and it skips over many details and subtleties. Comments are very welcome (but space for extra text is very limited).

It's still a bit complex at first sight, but I think we could reduce the strategic questions to 5 or 6. My preference is to tackle that for a few weeks, before attempting to munge the drafts.

fwiw, the SVG file format is almost ready for inclusion in an I-D.

Regards
   Brian Carpenter

On 19-Sep-20 03:55, Eliot Lear wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> 
> 
> “When you come to a fork in the road, take it.”
> — Yogi Bera
> 
> The chairs have had an opportunity to discuss the last interim.  We note that some people liked the comparison chart, as a means to highlight both similarities and differences.   We know that some people would very much like to have seen a draft adopted, while others were not ready to move forward.  Several people would instead like to go issue by issue and resolve those issues before adopting a draft.  The chairs will leave this choice to the group as to which way to proceed at the moment.
> 
> You are invited to specify your preference *on list* *by September 25th, 2:00pm GMT.  Option A or Option B.  Please be explicit.*
> 
> We can pursue one of two approaches:
> 
> *Option A:  Pursue adopting a draft*
> 
> The approach would be that we *would* adopt a draft by IETF 109 – *as a starting point*.  To avoid further deadlocks, there would be *no* “I’m not ready” option in the hum.  Authors are invited to merge and indicate open issues in drafts.  Others are invited, if they really feel the need, to create new drafts within 2-3 weeks.  If there are more than two options, the chairs will find ways to wheedle things down to get to a draft to adopt, while being sensitive to the concerns EKR and others raised about inertia of what is in a draft.  If the group would like an interim to facilitate this option, the chairs will accommodate.
> 
> *Option B: Pursue open issues one by one*
> 
> Pursue issues one by one to resolve on list, starting with “Do people believe that the RSE position should continue in some form?”  We would pursue from the nature of the role if we get an affirmative answer.  Other questions would follow, such as aspects of oversight and relationship to RPC.
> 
> If after the poll the group is evenly divided between these choices, in order to take the fork, the chairs will spin a spinner and make a decision.  You are encouraged to discuss these options, and may change your minds right up to the deadline.
> 
> *A Plea*
> 
> This program consists nearly exclusively of senior members of the community-  you are all past or current leaders of this organization with deep experience and knowledge.  We therefore hope that you will seek to find common ground with one another when you see a deadlock in view.
> 
> Brian and Eliot
> 
>