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

On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 1:24 AM, Rob Sayre <sayrer@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 3, 2022 at 4:06 PM Eric Rescorla <ekr@rtfm.com> 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/
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/ and the EMODIR (
https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/emodir/about/) resources and the IETF104
newcomers sessions (
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),
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
> tao-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tao-discuss
>
>