Re: [tao-discuss] [Gendispatch] Requests for IETF 114

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

Warren,

On 07-Jun-22 03:28, Warren Kumari wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 1:24 AM, Rob Sayre <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> 
>     On Fri, Jun 3, 2022 at 4:06 PM Eric Rescorla <[e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
> 
> 
>         I do agree that the material needs to be accurate, but I also think that if we treat this like a Web page that can be changed rather than an RFC, the stakes are a lot lower. If we find something wrong, we just 
change it.
> 
> 
>     Lars raised the point that RFC 6722 makes revisions of the document require IESG approval. The result is a poorly supported bureaucratic process.
> 
>     The text of the document is mostly good advice, but the name is a bit tacky. I'd suggest writing an RFC that obsoletes all revisions and RFC 
6722, and points at a general IETF web page that can be revised as freely 
as ekr suggests.
> 
> 
> 
> I actually believe that the Tao should be an RFC, and progressed and reviewed just like any other RFC. I'll happily agree that updating an RFC is a massive faff, and takes much too long to make simple updates, but I think that *that* is a problem that we should solve.
> 
> For the general "how to participate" and "general IETF web page that can be revised as freely as ekr suggests", we already have these — they are the "general IETF web page that can be revised as freely as ekr suggests" :-)
> 
> We have:
> https://www.ietf.org/about/participate/get-started/ <https://www.ietf.org/about/participate/get-started/>

As it happens, I drafted the original version of that page in 2013, and I 
believe this text has survived pretty much unchanged:

"The Tao of the IETF is a must read document. If you read nothing else, read this."

The basic question here, where there appears to be genuine disagreement, is whether we want that statement to remain true.

Personally, I think it's good to have a single document for this material, and that it should be printable. Whether it is an RFC or not is a side issue.

    Brian


> and "a series of video testimonials from other attendees talking about their first meeting." and "IETF Newcomers Introduction Videos"  and "The IETF Newcomers' Tutorial" and "How to Read an RFC" (an"blog post by Mark Nottingham provides a practical approach to reading RFCs, the document format in which specifications developed in the IETF are published.") and a huge pile of presentations and resources at https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/edu/materials/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/edu/materials/> and the EMODIR (https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/emodir/about/ <https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/emodir/about/>) resources and the IETF104 newcomers sessions (https://www.ietf.org/live/previous/live104/ietf104-newcomers-tutorial/ <https://www.ietf.org/live/previous/live104/ietf104-newcomers-tutorial/>) and (one of my favorite) Scott Bradner's "bite-sized IETF introductory videos" (https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLC86T-6ZTP5hXPJ-n4mwJbZ0BHaNlhTMA 
> <https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLC86T-6ZTP5hXPJ-n4mwJbZ0BHaNlhTMA>), and … [0]
> 
> My point is that we *already* have the IETF webpages, and that those can be updated whenever and however we like — but, to me, the Tao is "special", and that this is a good thing.
> 
> I think that the content of the Tao should reflect the consensus of the 
community, and should reflect (and guide) our ethos.  We already have the web site, and it can be updated easily and at the whim of whoever is in charge of those bits, and reflects the consensus of whoever/whichever group decides to so — but it doesn't get the normal IETF consensus review, and doesn't necessarily reflect the IETF community.
> 
> I think that we should have a "higher level" document — and that that is the Tao.
> So, my proposal is that the Tao becomes an RFC again and be progressed just like any other, and that the "general IETF web page that can be revised as freely as ekr suggests" already exists.
> 
> 
> W
> [0]: Note: I'm certainly not saying that our newcomers material is perfect or complete - the people participating in Edu / Emo / newcomers / guides, etc are "doing God's work"[0], please help them with this.
> 
> [1]: In the English idiomatic "Work that is very important and necessary, especially that which receives little or no recognition or pay." meaning — no religious meaning  implied…
> 
> 
>     thanks,
>     Rob
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     tao-discuss mailing list
>     [e-mail] <mailto:[e-mail]>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tao-discuss <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tao-discuss>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> tao-discuss mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tao-discuss
>