Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Wed, 20 December 2017 16:06 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 618661242F7 for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Dec 2017 08:06:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 8N51nr5tPCWA for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 20 Dec 2017 08:06:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qk0-x235.google.com (mail-qk0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::235]) (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 526531241F3 for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Dec 2017 08:06:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qk0-x235.google.com with SMTP id i190so6896324qka.5 for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 20 Dec 2017 08:06:37 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=cKeT7swYWHHNkD82Robu3jVy5l8H4VNm/Og3wLKtl9w=; b=d4gWCwqXNG4E0jzbpnJ2VKvSKGe309HhbKSM0eWuPzKoqx9w7RiYRPjHpwcRfjOT5W FbUQUtzGJRavatYckTorFJEHPYFq67ee6tcieIT9Z6KtX1dZCSlDgiOpaRDRLxhcWtMN OFXrbQ/xs9FHj89nOyuWS6NqyS3NNjMruiEsbh7OkxYC/u5bp4EEbRPw6ScS66wpnZre nXjGmgyatVvHMxdzz47msKje4zhy5trbp20t+kzblDAA/blp1d/a8fldT1p+ZSjNZ+AD 5oK8QhcaiE5giElPdbvL5FLeR1HE0F3vT7ppNuzUDUjENBLzIBwJkA1Ol5/kKOqQfeO6 rzxg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=cKeT7swYWHHNkD82Robu3jVy5l8H4VNm/Og3wLKtl9w=; b=fxr5a5GyXq/I8bjy5TcLl13Xtg0g6vXT8dXfV8i4pznrSwB1wFN8qMHMUQYd276xgG o1jstEaqctwyD+EKu4Mc16SL1PJpQWGFhGbR9qvqj0/nukS2T3oVfsvENOs7tm2A/0ca v51TmG0f+WL7/wNxcIej978xnDOrzOlwA5DLTKgAREvaaZWA3ku7tCmpV9M1f285JYpH PXXxmHpS9eYQePzQY+Yd4EDx+oBQzs4p8HyVjqZbbdLk50IOsqz0wX7waGi4RpUl4PXd Ak3X79b9Msm8jF6MsF78HoyfRQCGb07IdgX++X2JYfi/lNCxffwHpGE04fFEjjk3tWDA Ceqg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mK2FWbH+Hr6QG4XFRvBq83Fxe3A1UR+wT3UgtaFNXnGXH1Tlkeb twQpyYlvIwSEZIcd6GxdwWAQTw==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBot37kI58fvBB6UfLfGlnk3kRYRH6T9zRGCT8x89sOQXjF+CGlcnf0rQ4Mo0hWvPEqyfZcNbKA==
X-Received: by 10.55.21.5 with SMTP id f5mr9608837qkh.20.1513785996238; Wed, 20 Dec 2017 08:06:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.0.30.153] (c-24-60-163-103.hsd1.nh.comcast.net. [24.60.163.103]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g8sm10674561qth.68.2017.12.20.08.06.34 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 20 Dec 2017 08:06:35 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.2 \(3445.5.20\))
Subject: Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
In-Reply-To: <BBF5DDFE515C3946BC18D733B20DAD233AA98825@XMB122CNC.rim.net>
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2017 11:06:33 -0500
Cc: ietf <ietf@ietf.org>, rtgwg <rtgwg@ietf.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <60324BD8-E91D-49C7-9AE6-C6E22C836AC8@fugue.com>
References: <AM4PR0401MB2241817BD0EEEE79B32C8CD2BD0F0@AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com> <51b495e6-ee1d-4224-6c7c-dec0f8248cc9@cisco.com> <D6601576.27F3B%christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> <BBF5DDFE515C3946BC18D733B20DAD233AA98562@XMB122CNC.rim.net> <AM4PR0401MB22414952845433B8D59CCC90BD0C0@AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com> <BBF5DDFE515C3946BC18D733B20DAD233AA98825@XMB122CNC.rim.net>
To: Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@hotmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.5.20)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/cr30aplUeOgF6Ku_eVpLRzPK_zc>
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Working Group <rtgwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtgwg/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2017 16:06:41 -0000

On Dec 20, 2017, at 9:18 AM, Andrew Allen <aallen@blackberry.com> wrote:
> So I think your first task is to write a draft that clearly explains the problems and the requirements to solve those problems without addressing the specifics of the solutions you envision and then achieve consensus on the problems and requirements.

I think actually the first task is to meditate on the question of how what I am thinking of doing will benefit the IETF and the IETF's constituents, and how it will benefit me.   The second part is important, because it helps to put things in perspective.   If you find during this meditation that you can think of lots of reasons why the work will benefit me, and aren't able to come up with reasons why it will benefit the IETF or the IETF's constituents, then you need to meditate some more.

Of course, knowing what will benefit the IETF and the IETF's constituents is a hard problem; it's hard even to know who the IETF is or who its constituents are.   If you find that you are kiting a lot of proposals that aren't getting a positive reception from the IETF, there's a good chance that your model of who the IETF is and who its constituents are doesn't agree with the IETF participants who have reacted inhospitably to your proposal.

So the goal of the meditation isn't really to know the answers to the questions you are meditating on.   It's just to familiarize yourself with your own thinking about your relationship to the IETF, so that you can start to notice places where this thinking does not match reality.   As you repeat this process over time, if you do it with an open and skeptical mind, you will probably find yourself more able to come up with ideas that people are interested in and want to work with you on.

Another very valuable thing to do is just sit and listen to people talk about problems in the IETF, and then see if you can come up with a small, narrowly scoped proposal that will help to solve one of those problems.   Or even an insight you can share on the mailing list that helps to better focus the discussion.

Like the meditation I suggested, if you do this for an extended period of time (years), you will eventually have the credibility that is required to do something more ambitious and broadly scoped.   Starting at the beginning with a redesign of the architecture of the Internet is the exact opposite of this approach, and it's why you are experiencing so much resistance.  It's not that the problem isn't interesting—it's that you are building a castle on a foundation of sand.