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

On 09-Jun-22 00:46, Warren Kumari wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, Jun 8 2022 at 2:12 AM, Niels ten Oever <mail@nielstenoever.net <mailto:mail@nielstenoever.net>> wrote:
> 
>>     On 07-06-2022 13:04, Jay Daley wrote:
>>> 
>>>         The problems I have with it though are not minor. The name itself, ’Tao’, is a reference too far. Sure some of use have read "The Tao of Pooh" and get the allusion but for most people, it goes straight over their heads
>> 
>>     I agree with this point. The name 'Tao' is neither funny nor helping people understand what the document is about.

Agreed (and I've never even read the Tao of Pooh, despite coming out as Eeyore on the relevant personality test). But I think the cultural reference is probably inappropriate for the current very multicultural IETF.

> 
> I happen to like the Tao name, but it certainly isn't a hill I'm willing to even stub my toe on...
> 
> 
>> 
>>>         More importantly though, I sincerely doubt that it is of any practical use to its intended audience - it’s far too sprawling, detailed and full of rules to be of use to a newcomer. To be quite candid, every time someone recommends to a newcomer that they read the Tao, I cringe. What it does do is provide a useful reference for long-term participants (where else are the dot colours documented) but that’s not the intended audience. It’s become more a series of authoritative statements that can be referenced/found individually than a flowing document.
> 
>>     I think there is place for a 'Tao'-like document - if only for referencing by newcomers.
> 
>>     I don't see why an RFC'ed Tao, a good website, and video content could not all live side-by-side. We don't need to have one learning path for all newcomers, people consume knowledge in different ways.
> 

That is a key point and is behind the disagreement about whether we need a separate Tao-like document as well as carefully designed web pages and "journeys". But the downside of having both is that we risk ending up with *four* versions of the truth about IETF procedures:

1. The official version in the various BCPs.
2. The carefully designed version in the web pages.
3. Various videos and educational presentations.
4. The carefully drafted version in the Tao.

Making these four versions consistent is far from easy and requires constant attention.

    Brian

> 
> Yup, that's what I was proposing, but I did it much much less clearly and with more rant.
> 
>>     Therefore I agree to obsolete RFC6722.
> 
> 
> Yup -- I think that RFC6722 was a fine idea, and that it was worth trying, but when it was written we didn't really have all of the other publication options. Yes, we had a website, but we didn't have a Greg, and it wasn't as approachable for newcomers. I certainly don't think that 6722 was a bad document, just that the world changed around it and that it has outlived its usefulness.
> 
> This will be a fun consensus call -- I feel strongly that the Tao (or something like it) should remain, and be an RFC. What I haven't yet figured out is if the opposition[0] is of the form "this seems silly, but if y'all want to waste your time with this, go ahead" or "you will rue the day...". I'm hoping it is the former, because having multiple sources for this sort of information doesn't seem like it is harmful, but I may be wrong...
> 
> W
> 
> [0]: Me? Be melodramatic about something like this? Never!!!!
> 
>     Best,
> 
>     Niels
> 
>     -- 
>     Niels ten Oever, PhD
>     Postdoctoral Researcher - Media Studies Department - University of Amsterdam Affiliated Faculty - Digital Democracy Institute - Simon Fraser University Non-Resident Fellow 2022-2023 - Center for Democracy & Technology Associated Scholar - Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade - Fundação Getúlio Vargas Research Fellow - Centre for Internet and Human Rights - European University Viadrina
> 
>     Vice chair - Global Internet Governance Academic Network (GigaNet)
> 
>     W: https://nielstenoever.net <https://nielstenoever.net>
>     E: mail@nielstenoever.net <mailto:mail@nielstenoever.net>
>     T: @nielstenoever
>     P/S/WA: +31629051853
>     PGP: 2458 0B70 5C4A FD8A 9488 643A 0ED8 3F3A 468A C8B3
> 
>     Read my latest article on Internet infrastructure governance in Globalizations here: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14747731.2021.1953221 <https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14747731.2021.1953221>
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     tao-discuss mailing list
>     tao-discuss@ietf.org <mailto:tao-discuss@ietf.org>
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tao-discuss <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tao-discuss>
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> tao-discuss mailing list
> tao-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tao-discuss