Re: [Tools-discuss] IETF Administration LLC staffing update

Jay Daley <> Tue, 08 June 2021 04:59 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 944063A2141; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 21:59:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.897
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.897 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id maZ9drM71UhI; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 21:59:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (unknown []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BA0233A2140; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 21:59:35 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail-5A8531E2-E000-4DF7-A653-80C3BB56FDE1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Jay Daley <>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2021 16:59:33 +1200
Message-Id: <>
References: <>
Cc: Tools Team Discussion <>, The IESG <>
In-Reply-To: <>
To: Adam Roach <>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (18F72)
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Tools-discuss] IETF Administration LLC staffing update
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF Tools Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2021 04:59:42 -0000

Hi Adam

> On 8/06/2021, at 4:04 PM, Adam Roach <> wrote:
> [cc'ing the IESG for their awareness, since authority over the domain has historically been in their remit]
>> On 6/7/21 19:40, IETF Executive Director wrote:
>> Lee-Berkeley is an experienced fundraiser, most recently with the Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT).  She is based in the United States and can be reached at
> I'm surprised to see new personal addresses being provisioned under "". My recollection is that we had a discussion between the IESG and the LLC some while back (when I was still a member of the IESG) where we concluded that this is a confusing practice that might lead to conflicts in the future. 

I’ll leave the IESG to speak for themselves but I will note that this new email address was created with the permission of the IESG. The previous email for our Senior SDE did not have prior permission because I thought there was an agreement to use a specific naming scheme - - to avoid any possible future conflicts, but my recollection was off the mark and so this time I specifically sought permission. 

> The last I recall seeing on the topic was over a year ago, at which point it sounded like there was an active plan to move ahead with "" email addresses:
> Where do we stand on that plan, and what is the current thinking about how we might unwind in-use personal addresses under ""?

That email was not setting out a plan, only noting a number of possibilities. 

As I understand it, “conflicts in the future“ could mean either a naming conflict or a conflict of representation. The former can be addressed by a naming scheme such as initial.lastname if initialslastname is not sufficient. The latter is more complex as the LLC does represent the IETF but only in the limited areas of finance, meetings, legal compliance and contracts.  Any issue with confusion would come from someone in the LLC overstepping that in the content of their emails, no matter the form of their address. 

However, and in case there is any doubt, this is solely within the purview of the IESG to decide and not the LLC. 


Jay Daley
IETF Executive Director

> /a