Re: [tao-discuss] New version of the "Tao of the IETF" published

[Joel Halpern <[e-mail]>]

That, the IESG reviewing all IDs for RFC publication, is why I suggested 
the second modification.  My concern is that although the IESG does 
indeed review IRTF and ISE documents, the review choices, criteria, 
votes, etc. are not those you carefully (and accurately) list for the 
IETF stream.  So I was looking for someway to simply avoid the inaccuracy.

Yours,

Joel

On 9/9/2022 1:48 PM, Niels ten Oever wrote:
> Hi Joel,
>
> Is it not the case that the IESG also reviews  the other stream RFCs 
> to ensure that there is no overlap?  I thought that is how it is 
> described in several process documents, at least I  case for IRTF 
> RFCs, but i think also for IS.
>
> But then of course theory and practice might vary.
>
> Best,
>
> Niels
> On 9 Sep 2022, at 18:46, Joel Halpern <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>     I do not want to be too picky.  I understand that it is impossible to
>     get the wording of the Tao perfect.  And I understand that it does not
>     need to be precise or complete in describing our process.  (If it were,
>     it would likely be unreadable.)
>
>     However, in the section describing the IESG processing of RFCs, I see
>     that the text claims that the IESG reviews EACH (emphasis added) drafts
>     that are becoming RFCs.  And the text as written implies that in all
>     cases those reviews result in ballots with the described positions.
>     However, that is not the case,  IRTF drafts and Independent Stream
>     drafts do not get that treatment.   When we next edit this, could we
>     change that slightly?
>
>     Maybe make it "each IETF produced RFC"?  Or at the section that says "As
>     part of the document reviews" make that "For IETF produced RFCs, as part
>     of the document reviews"?  (I would have used "stream" rather than
>     "produced" but I think that might be confusing for newcomers as they
>     often are not familiar with RFC streams.)
>
>     Yours,
>
>     Joel
>
>     On 9/9/2022 10:27 AM, IETF Chair wrote:
>
>         [Forwarding this on behalf of the Tao editors - Lars] Dear
>         all, I am very happy to announce the new version of the Tao of
>         the IETF [0]. This version significantly benefited from
>         suggestions and contributions by the community, most notably
>         from Rich Salz, for which I as editor am very thankful. This
>         publication would also not have been possible without the
>         support of Greg Wood and the review of the IESG. The IESG
>         requested for future iterations to have smaller changes, so I
>         intend to increase the publication pace. However, this also
>         depends on the discussion about the future of the Tao. Best,
>         Niels Editor of the Tao PS New suggestions are of course
>         always welcome on tao-discuss and on Github as PR
>         (https://github.com/ietf/tao/blob/main/Tao.md) [0]
>         https://ietf.org/tao
>         ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>         IETF-Announce mailing list [e-mail]
>         https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce 
>
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>     tao-discuss mailing list
>     [e-mail]
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tao-discuss
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> tao-discuss mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tao-discuss