Re: [trill] TRILL WG Secretary Appointment

Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com> Mon, 10 December 2012 14:29 UTC

Return-Path: <narten@us.ibm.com>
X-Original-To: trill@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: trill@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBE3521F8422 for <trill@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 06:29:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gQh-df6dh4Ve for <trill@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 06:29:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from e9.ny.us.ibm.com (e9.ny.us.ibm.com [32.97.182.139]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 081E121F841E for <trill@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 06:29:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from /spool/local by e9.ny.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for <trill@ietf.org> from <narten@us.ibm.com>; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:29:13 -0500
Received: from d01dlp03.pok.ibm.com (9.56.250.168) by e9.ny.us.ibm.com (192.168.1.109) with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:29:10 -0500
Received: from d01relay03.pok.ibm.com (d01relay03.pok.ibm.com [9.56.227.235]) by d01dlp03.pok.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD533C90067 for <trill@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:29:09 -0500 (EST)
Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (d03av03.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.195.169]) by d01relay03.pok.ibm.com (8.13.8/8.13.8/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id qBAET8UW197636 for <trill@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:29:08 -0500
Received: from d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVout) with ESMTP id qBAET4xN014024 for <trill@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 07:29:04 -0700
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com ([9.80.11.210]) by d03av03.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.4/8.13.1/NCO v10.0 AVin) with ESMTP id qBAET2ul013793 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 10 Dec 2012 07:29:03 -0700
Received: from cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com (8.14.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id qBAET1hT002103; Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:29:01 -0500
Message-Id: <201212101429.qBAET1hT002103@cichlid.raleigh.ibm.com>
To: Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com>
In-reply-to: <CAF4+nEH6WghtR0mkz+FYr7yrk5+d+pGUXtPJdCqGNguS0u0fhw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAF4+nEFPjrnjkV8EfMyVrUcSNqhHy3gFM+nwX-4pWU4iC8HPdw@mail.gmail.com> <FBEA3E19AA24F847BA3AE74E2FE193562888C7FE@xmb-rcd-x08.cisco.com> <CAF4+nEH6WghtR0mkz+FYr7yrk5+d+pGUXtPJdCqGNguS0u0fhw@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Donald Eastlake <d3e3e3@gmail.com> message dated "Sat, 08 Dec 2012 19:49:06 -0500."
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 09:29:01 -0500
From: Thomas Narten <narten@us.ibm.com>
X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER
x-cbid: 12121014-7182-0000-0000-000003A92FEA
Cc: "Tissa Senevirathne (tsenevir)" <tsenevir@cisco.com>, "trill@ietf.org" <trill@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [trill] TRILL WG Secretary Appointment
X-BeenThere: trill@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Developing a hybrid router/bridge." <trill.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/trill>, <mailto:trill-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/trill>
List-Post: <mailto:trill@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:trill-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill>, <mailto:trill-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 14:29:16 -0000

> > 2. Any precedence in IETF that WG appointing a secretary ?

> If you read RFC 2418, the basic WG RFC, you would think that it was
> normal for most WGs to have a Secretary. In fact, it is not
> particularly common, but there have been WG Secretaries before.
> Officially, a WG Secretary is appointed by the AD, not the WG.

Not sure why you say the WG secretary is an AD appointment. It is
clearly a WG function that falls under the responsibily of the
chairs. And RFC 2418 describes the WG Secretary role as as subsection
of 6.1 (WG Chair) saying:

>    The Chair has the responsibility and the authority to make decisions,
>    on behalf of the working group, regarding all matters of working
>    group process and staffing, in conformance with the rules of the
>    IETF.  The AD has the authority and the responsibility to assist in
>    making those decisions at the request of the Chair or when
>    circumstances warrant such an intervention.

While it would be fine (as appropriate) to consult with the ADs on
such (or any) potential appointment, this seems to be a WG chair
responsibility.

In any case, congratulations Jon!

Thomas