Re: [Rfced-future] Style guide and other non-strategic things ** Consensus check on part of Issue 12: Is the person an advisor (RSA) or an Executive Editor (RSE) **

Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net> Sun, 29 November 2020 06:47 UTC

Return-Path: <huitema@huitema.net>
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 B147F3A1278 for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 22:47:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.889
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.889 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 WjiQAmUdK4is for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 22:47:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx43-out1.antispamcloud.com (mx43-out1.antispamcloud.com [138.201.61.189]) (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 4D9F93A1277 for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 22:47:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from xse7.mail2web.com ([66.113.196.7] helo=xse.mail2web.com) by mx18.antispamcloud.com with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <huitema@huitema.net>) id 1kjGUO-0000eF-4g for rfced-future@iab.org; Sun, 29 Nov 2020 07:47:23 +0100
Received: from xsmtp21.mail2web.com (unknown [10.100.68.60]) by xse.mail2web.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CkJnY3K8Hz1kbD for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 22:47:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.5.2.17] (helo=xmail07.myhosting.com) by xsmtp21.mail2web.com with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from <huitema@huitema.net>) id 1kjGUL-0005de-BE for rfced-future@iab.org; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 22:47:13 -0800
Received: (qmail 12463 invoked from network); 29 Nov 2020 06:47:13 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO [192.168.1.104]) (Authenticated-user:_huitema@huitema.net@[172.58.46.151]) (envelope-sender <huitema@huitema.net>) by xmail07.myhosting.com (qmail-ldap-1.03) with ESMTPA for <rfced-future@iab.org>; 29 Nov 2020 06:47:12 -0000
To: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
Cc: rfced-future@iab.org
References: <058501d6c576$43e4cfd0$cbae6f70$@olddog.co.uk> <ebaa0212-267a-b863-05a2-9a0d18d7ff1b@huitema.net> <CABcZeBP=Vfbw_Xj+pVrbXeagOiFrLjiETOCpvy_tZ3+dG6JxOw@mail.gmail.com> <ecc477fd-6d5b-9071-0b14-19f53d7883cc@joelhalpern.com> <CABcZeBOAYL+VvHxmzQVkhmf-7t1qFr+1-zn82Og8OmZpE2i8AQ@mail.gmail.com> <EFF69E77-6E03-4117-B237-410C59CA5139@tzi.org> <4056534f-38a1-6127-23ea-7c97b8d1bd89@huitema.net> <a1b41bd6-ef74-224d-73c0-47dbdbf07966@joelhalpern.com>
From: Christian Huitema <huitema@huitema.net>
Message-ID: <10a60d4b-0bc5-c6d3-905c-6ddaecb98737@huitema.net>
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2020 22:47:12 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <a1b41bd6-ef74-224d-73c0-47dbdbf07966@joelhalpern.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
X-Originating-IP: 66.113.196.7
X-Spampanel-Domain: xsmtpout.mail2web.com
X-Spampanel-Username: 66.113.196.7/32
Authentication-Results: antispamcloud.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=66.113.196.7/32@xsmtpout.mail2web.com
X-Spampanel-Outgoing-Class: unsure
X-Spampanel-Outgoing-Evidence: Combined (0.15)
X-Recommended-Action: accept
X-Filter-ID: Mvzo4OR0dZXEDF/gcnlw0fJVsTFCFA1YlcTpjJcy6PSpSDasLI4SayDByyq9LIhVUZbR67CQ7/vm /hHDJU4RXkTNWdUk1Ol2OGx3IfrIJKywOmJyM1qr8uRnWBrbSAGDjRzgyua+oKUgQGcbmeu+KPhY RkpFG1KU35iPF8F1Y4gpBbJTpbRVHiiW/YzwH8e3QVFPFt+4EqMnp4CTDhVg0lKlzDUUdXZXKiJE 9FAeBYpBbCpe79Kozx0nomzoHNuEVy1fjNZA0UnjqgajXwVOqw7GrRD93GuKsil0DsNlfaQNjS91 xLLHjz8tOnVewUzjKn6AaXxoL/FjeXc4guU5t5coTPkiAq+E/1gvF2d40ruQVyADaS6UpCBADjTx teudCa15Ytj/yAhGv8ezOASMHW/bWfgucjnNmABpGhD9TTsjQT2BGVI0EbGkW8Q42wJCdCZm6kTr qH+fmxyzQoG+NtezYqxGMqsKjARq8PBC4qjRn0hhkccum+xyb3k4eNalTAas0edmB2q/yBRqnQY9 Wp4oEuFb796V1/nl3YbqwU/VPb6Z51AWQAUvAUQbV3oqEaMjfjmXaBok2IyAEprch60jiD6XqsJZ tjQxlyCdsezUTEAumaS8EPUiWeF3NFNfXt7BluAMaAukv11AovGyYhXpoMt52pBRrlQsf2clgvuS ax8yVT5LNQc0pviCIZ+VrEYBxX5sKcPtmaTbL1XTREqTD2ipD9y2znxCv9uYkc8RFZ4oobg8BBg3 Jq+ntzj0QgINkY+Hul+a3CMdKh9AgoaPmF/7MAKyW1Kb4FKGpjRt1rxcfJxEyn03r4GRhqyKmz6U lOoas/Ux4vgzjcGjPTLNmVyX0/oDKtieLSWbWqk5dWKRXX7DAg4Lg5nXzVBkfqb5R4VemuUI6bcE ARsm0De6PaZO6/JToEyx4tmc5OljkPSpPXAVjl2oMr8a1xm0wfXUFMjTH2DyD8i5kO5bZlYFvf25 LVONYbYifH5OzZCwIgD/xDehea09OpnwSuobZrrGExMR7eTbBjMGDKI3ijhhJn7Muv/NHXl0o++8 3wM=
X-Report-Abuse-To: spam@quarantine11.antispamcloud.com
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfced-future/w30kP2utIcZO3Yv1G5UcEzPO-5s>
Subject: Re: [Rfced-future] Style guide and other non-strategic things ** Consensus check on part of Issue 12: Is the person an advisor (RSA) or an Executive Editor (RSE) **
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: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 06:47:33 -0000

On 11/28/2020 10:42 PM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:

> Depending upon what you mean by "look exactly like" below, the 
> statement is either irelevant or does not match what I have seen as 
> existing practice.

I mean content and general organization. I do agree with you, Joel, that 
the same style guide applies to all streams.

-- Christian Huitema

>
> We go to significant trouble to create and maintain a consistent look 
> and feel across all RFCs.  there is an argument that they should be 
> more distinguished, as some people think / hope that would reduce the 
> all too common confusions.  (Of course, one would then want I-Ds to 
> look more distinct as well.)
>
> But untill and unless we agree as a community on making that change, 
> our existing practice has been to work for and value such consistency.
>
> Yours,
> Joel
>
> On 11/29/2020 1:36 AM, Christian Huitema wrote:
>> On 11/28/2020 10:12 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
>>
>>> On 2020-11-28, at 23:07, Eric Rescorla<ekr@rtfm.com>  wrote:
>>>> As I'm sure I've said before, from my perspective, the various 
>>>> streams are
>>>> customers of the RFC series, and ultimately it needs to serve their 
>>>> needs.
>>> Agree completely.
>>>
>>> But the RFC series may actually be better able to serve their needs 
>>> if there is a way to have actual push-back on some not-so-good ideas 
>>> of a particular stream manager.
>>
>>
>> I agree with EKR that having the RPC escalate "author disagreements" 
>> to the stream manager would quickly resolve most of the issues. I am 
>> not too concerned about "uniformity of the series" arguments, since 
>> by definition research papers from the IRTF will not look exactly 
>> like proposed standards from the IETF, or individual contributions in 
>> the independent stream. If that's really becoming a problem, then the 
>> "strategic" body looks like a good place to discuss it.
>>
>> -- Christian Huitema
>>
>>