Re: [secdir] ADs and directorates

"Moriarty, Kathleen" <kathleen.moriarty@emc.com> Wed, 06 March 2013 15:50 UTC

Return-Path: <kathleen.moriarty@emc.com>
X-Original-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: secdir@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C819121F8A55 for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Mar 2013 07:50:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.500, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ekXuhaMPXqOC for <secdir@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Mar 2013 07:50:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mexforward.lss.emc.com (hop-nat-141.emc.com [168.159.213.141]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2978621F8AAC for <secdir@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Mar 2013 07:50:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hop04-l1d11-si03.isus.emc.com (HOP04-L1D11-SI03.isus.emc.com [10.254.111.23]) by mexforward.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id r26FoUBQ016634 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 6 Mar 2013 10:50:31 -0500
Received: from mailhub.lss.emc.com (mailhubhoprd05.lss.emc.com [10.254.222.129]) by hop04-l1d11-si03.isus.emc.com (RSA Interceptor); Wed, 6 Mar 2013 10:50:16 -0500
Received: from mxhub12.corp.emc.com (mxhub12.corp.emc.com [10.254.92.107]) by mailhub.lss.emc.com (Switch-3.4.3/Switch-3.4.3) with ESMTP id r26FoF97022298; Wed, 6 Mar 2013 10:50:15 -0500
Received: from mx15a.corp.emc.com ([169.254.1.118]) by mxhub12.corp.emc.com ([10.254.92.107]) with mapi; Wed, 6 Mar 2013 10:50:14 -0500
From: "Moriarty, Kathleen" <kathleen.moriarty@emc.com>
To: Leif Johansson <leifj@sunet.se>, "secdir@ietf.org" <secdir@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 10:50:13 -0500
Thread-Topic: [secdir] ADs and directorates
Thread-Index: Ac4ZPd3CTwXl1K6ST/mOQ2gY5rPlYwBQ+WSg
Message-ID: <F5063677821E3B4F81ACFB7905573F24D796AD59@MX15A.corp.emc.com>
References: <5134D949.4090206@cs.tcd.ie> <51354547.2070800@sunet.se>
In-Reply-To: <51354547.2070800@sunet.se>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-EMM-MHVC: 1
Subject: Re: [secdir] ADs and directorates
X-BeenThere: secdir@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Security Area Directorate <secdir.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/secdir>
List-Post: <mailto:secdir@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir>, <mailto:secdir-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2013 15:50:32 -0000

I've been talking about this with a colleague who is active in transport.  Rather than not have a second AD, I really don't see why they don't use a directorate to fill the gaps in knowledge from the selected candidate (they went through at least 5-6 already).  They are already talking about training on congestion control to prepare more future candidates, so a stop-gap solution seems very reasonable to me.  It will be a lot of work for one AD to run TSV and then without a directorate... in addition to a day job (at least part time).

My .02
-Kathleen

-----Original Message-----
From: secdir-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:secdir-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Leif Johansson
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2013 8:07 PM
To: secdir@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [secdir] ADs and directorates

On 03/04/2013 06:26 PM, Stephen Farrell wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm sure some of you are following the discussion on
> the IETF discuss list about the transport area and
> the difficulty in finding an AD for that. (Thread
> starts at [1]).
>
> Some people are asking things like "could directorates
> help reduce the time commitment of ADs" and of course
> secdir are the poster-child good directorate (thanks
> again!) so Sean and I would like to get your opinions
> about that, as it might relate to secdir, at the lunch
> next week. (Or via mail if you won't be there.)
>
> Just as an example, some people are suggesting that
> directorates might take on more of the AD role, so
> for secdir, do you think that's crazy, worth-a-look,
> a really good idea, or something else?
That actually sounds a bit crazy to me. The AD role is mainly
a leadership role which makes it really had to split 20 odd
ways :-)

I would imagine that synchronizing between 2-3 ADs pose enough
of a challenge as it is.
>
> We're not proposing to actually do anything right
> now, but it'd be good if Sean and I knew what you
> folks think about such suggestions as they relate
> to the security area.
>
> Your more general thoughts would of course also be
> useful, but are probably better sent to the IETF
> discussion list.
>
> Thanks,
> S.
>
> [1] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg77418.html
>

_______________________________________________
secdir mailing list
secdir@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/secdir
wiki: http://tools.ietf.org/area/sec/trac/wiki/SecDirReview