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

Lars Eggert <> Tue, 08 June 2021 08:10 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 978B53A273D; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 01:10:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gmDuUWEFAWEv; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 01:09:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7966D3A2742; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 01:09:58 -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 7CABF60031C; Tue, 8 Jun 2021 11:09:34 +0300 (EEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;; s=dkim; t=1623139774; bh=dZbtIieohovCMqiW7FCxlxhV77BJJv6GaD6FVbZYNJU=; h=From:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:Cc:To:References; b=zX4SP7ZRstXmpEuS6qb9NB3yQHOkgLcgvxU15gNNpznm0RQsRUJsdkdUAamShsQJ9 r24KEGbbTjvDuO+iCHtTQlrE6eXP+Gyf8kL1tXk89omyG/rtdzplb+VK86NtV+AKXp E4BQJZVKzD9Nq/mlUzxKCCRZIq7kPgcZTAk28FQ0=
From: Lars Eggert <>
Message-Id: <>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_6E3C35EE-1D47-4A2D-AFCC-9E7470D54E3D"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.\))
Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2021 11:09:33 +0300
In-Reply-To: <>
Cc: Jay Daley <>, The IESG <>, Tools Team Discussion <>
To: Adam Roach <>
References: <> <> <>
X-MailScanner-ID: 7CABF60031C.A3822
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
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 08:10:04 -0000


On 2021-6-8, at 8:21, Adam Roach <> wrote:
> On 6/7/21 23:59, Jay Daley wrote:
>> 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.
> Okay -- this approach of continuing to grant exceptions differs materially and importantly from the conclusion that the IESG seated at IETF 104 reached.

that conclusion doesn't seem to have been minuted - we searched, but couldn't find anything. (I wish it had been.)

> I can see how the current situation would be both frustrating for you and tenuous in general: an ad-hoc system of one-off approvals seems capricious and unsustainable, especially in the face of a steering group that changes composition every year.
> As we all seem to be in agreement that the IESG has authority in this matter, I would implore this IESG to develop a formal position on the topic and write it down, both so that future IESGs have a point of reference for future decisions, and so that the community can be informed of decisions regarding stewardship of the domain.

Actually, the current IESG is currently finalizing a policy together with the LLC Board that should go for public comment soon.

Since Lee-Berkeley started before that could happen, we decided to approve as her personal email address. This is because she will almost exclusively interact with external individuals who may not have much familiarity with the IETF, and so an email address is therefore very helpful.