Re: [Rfced-future] A broader look (was: Re: RFC Editor liaison to the IAB? [was: Re: Comment on draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model-12])
Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch> Thu, 17 March 2022 07:44 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 2A1B13A0524; Thu, 17 Mar 2022 00:44:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_ALL=0.8, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, 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 LLzrK5Sel2oo; Thu, 17 Mar 2022 00:44:27 -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 6DEF53A0A73; Thu, 17 Mar 2022 00:44:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.0.129] (77-58-144-232.dclient.hispeed.ch [77.58.144.232]) (authenticated bits=0) by upstairs.ofcourseimright.com (8.15.2/8.15.2/Debian-18) with ESMTPSA id 22H7iLaj307082 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Thu, 17 Mar 2022 08:44:21 +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=1647503062; bh=GVibMf60jeeBmYgRiQZp3RuUplhucjJxX39Qjp5ASXo=; h=Date:To:Cc:References:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:From; b=mPTO61m/6EB5MtrGeZLnQfxGHegC7UbjbEgzqjHw+XwFqsb4zBJHOpqlTWhy1mzMu t/iCotw0XesZd0y+hZeEwkQvbX3bD0ZfPIWP7/1GoU0/LCtSk4r+Nfc+bb8Wz3sSGz Idc3H5B7EizuHO7cJNZP7ZRELpYUqMLVkm+GzhU8=
Message-ID: <ec94d7b8-01ab-0bf9-3d6b-1707fbed9142@lear.ch>
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2022 08:44:20 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.6.2
Content-Language: en-US
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>, John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
Cc: rfced-future@iab.org, "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>, Internet Architecture Board <iab@iab.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
References: <BY5PR11MB41963ABAE51BC46E205087BDB50B9@BY5PR11MB4196.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> <134294e0-5bd5-9b22-2d95-f6032e67f516@stpeter.im> <7D016D6C-ACCE-4431-BC83-905ECB885B5F@kuehlewind.net> <bf702de8-a876-3d9f-23d8-4ba49f86bd05@gmail.com> <E8C97678-AD00-402B-9646-DEFF6E76263D@ietf.org> <d4ac965c-65b1-e909-864c-cb14e27a3b0f@stpeter.im> <040d9aac-04be-2bef-fad4-b41f2af271e9@gmail.com> <B87EBCF2-16FB-4A22-86FF-20603200E749@ietf.org> <e012452a-61d1-f499-f19e-6d3ff9863901@gmail.com> <4AD933FC-4032-4A10-92DD-A34ADEDD557F@eggert.org> <CANMZLAZmrdxQuGT=W36gUf3gEd3d1C_0c-hfdO2-gpFUOQf7sg@mail.gmail.com> <AB5E3E46-D450-4E21-B67B-D639F67734AE@eggert.org> <e4b25205-af63-aff5-dbcc-9a16aa86b07d@lear.ch> <C2E0E777CD125A1439F4AACD@PSB> <3dabfc01-dfb6-0398-a9a1-5e9ee7e98dc8@gmail.com> <1C58527559239E9A8A6B4E05@PSB> <ECFE6F9B-C659-43B7-8FBF-62E29D4EE476@akamai.com> <6BB1E96BFA7AF6DD2A44748B@PSB> <54BD3D47-D6B6-42FA-BE87-3E9B771337F7@tzi.org>
From: Eliot Lear <lear@lear.ch>
In-Reply-To: <54BD3D47-D6B6-42FA-BE87-3E9B771337F7@tzi.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------o0NrNZyR0NetCr6Np5uVJOaP"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfced-future/rAfElOz7eJcEPbsYbbmLs0mZEtw>
Subject: Re: [Rfced-future] A broader look (was: Re: RFC Editor liaison to the IAB? [was: Re: Comment on draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model-12])
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: Thu, 17 Mar 2022 07:44:33 -0000
Hi Carston On 17.03.22 07:53, Carsten Bormann wrote: > > And it is all waterfall design. *Everything* is waterfall design until you establish a system that allows for more ... agile... flexibility. The RSWG / RSAB could do that by delegating certain aspects of authority into certain places to make things happen faster. For instance, it would be the height of silliness for the RSWG to have to approve all RFC Editor web site pages, but the scope of the authority of the RPC to make changes has to be clear. Similarly, I see no reason why the RSWG should have to make decisions around each and every commit relating to tooling that supports the RPC function, but again the scope of authority for checkins to be approved has to be clear. To take that a step further, if the output of tool causes material changes to the RFC structure or format, clearly that would be something that would at least require heightened review, but one that creates new representations or RFCs or takes in new input forms for the RPC might require less review. To me the RSWG and RSAB should be focused in establishing those scaling forms so that there is *less* waterfall, more delegation, andmore community participation, ably facilitated with the help of the RSCE). I realize that's a mouthful of a vision, but I don't think it's an original concept on my part. Eliot
- [Rfced-future] Comment on draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced… Rob Wilton (rwilton)
- Re: [Rfced-future] Comment on draft-iab-rfcefdp-r… Peter Saint-Andre
- [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB? [wa… Mirja Kuehlewind
- [Rfced-future] IAB liaison [Comment on draft-iab-… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Lars Eggert
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Lars Eggert
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Jay Daley
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Jay Daley
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Jean Mahoney
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Eliot Lear
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Brian Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Lars Eggert
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Brian Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Eliot Lear
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Lars Eggert
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Jean Mahoney
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… John C Klensin
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… John C Klensin
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Eliot Lear
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… John C Klensin
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… John C Klensin
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Salz, Rich
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Mirja Kuehlewind
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… John C Klensin
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Mirja Kuehlewind
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Mirja Kuehlewind
- [Rfced-future] A broader look (was: Re: RFC Edito… John C Klensin
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] RFC Editor liaison to the IAB?… Brian E Carpenter
- Re: [Rfced-future] A broader look (was: Re: RFC E… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Rfced-future] A broader look (was: Re: RFC E… John C Klensin
- Re: [Rfced-future] A broader look (was: Re: RFC E… Martin J. Dürst
- Re: [Rfced-future] A broader look (was: Re: RFC E… Carsten Bormann
- Re: [Rfced-future] A broader look (was: Re: RFC E… Eliot Lear
- Re: [Rfced-future] A broader look (was: Re: RFC E… S Moonesamy
- Re: [Rfced-future] A broader look (was: Re: RFC E… John C Klensin