IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: WG Conflict Clarity

Karen O'Donoghue <odonoghue@isoc.org> Fri, 28 June 2019 15:55 UTC

Return-Path: <odonoghue@isoc.org>
X-Original-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE3E41205F7 for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 08:55:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isoc.org
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LdpGYOblIUZD for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 08:55:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from NAM04-BN3-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn3nam04on0622.outbound.protection.outlook.com [IPv6:2a01:111:f400:fe4e::622]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ACD0F1203AC for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 08:55:22 -0700 (PDT)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=testarcselector01; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=id2d6XHgRKFF39oaX5jdSNnwQUz4xn+G0UVMD97kNulFGdCJWtZUsWvWDV43Slvt812e9N3nzW56/ncaFgE2T+cNdOMmwNi8Mn9bgxugGHRlunadiiiImgg9+WqGBHaUaE0xH37jOkJl/vgl2kEe5qwPgzO/ktyjwrZM+oCsvII=
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=testarcselector01; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=Fr94KKtd6YrgR+hRQC2EdSswJxgXILZq8rkyEX9hgfA=; b=OzjzQ5yWQLTBsGYJTmpRNqqULRgMjcD2mo1dBmIzARrzCLIEh2rfTst+ALUL2zKbVHIQ4bl4o2W945MBYyXtO+40NRA8Cayf++s1o6jEu6gNeqZog/U7HHKmR+KRyoHz0KyloSF66SpdEbD0XbB/mDcceWLP8/Mhlrow0IGHBxk=
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; test.office365.com 1;spf=none;dmarc=none;dkim=none;arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=isoc.org; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=Fr94KKtd6YrgR+hRQC2EdSswJxgXILZq8rkyEX9hgfA=; b=pzO02IcTkBNq5gf0oQ5gzxpA+eZEEJECSp763rCyTZtjoj4rjsI/rYNd3fNIVDref5dwvI0c8bzferkHByuRyL57c26+e11UJ5CLROFJ0hgZ9ngW58lSRpVjqOzwqr8bFWIA2Y9Py9lo1ll12oa8zArE6hSIc6FoPXPV4gw3h7s=
Received: from DM6PR06MB6234.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (20.178.226.80) by DM6PR06MB6347.namprd06.prod.outlook.com (20.178.28.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.2008.18; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 15:55:20 +0000
Received: from DM6PR06MB6234.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::8082:75d3:4625:b8a6]) by DM6PR06MB6234.namprd06.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::8082:75d3:4625:b8a6%7]) with mapi id 15.20.2008.017; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 15:55:20 +0000
From: Karen O'Donoghue <odonoghue@isoc.org>
To: "wgchairs@ietf.org" <wgchairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: WG Conflict Clarity
Thread-Topic: WG Conflict Clarity
Thread-Index: AQHVLb2goQUugxAB4kG5BC+Lunu1wqaxOEgA
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 15:55:20 +0000
Message-ID: <057BEAF4-D070-4EA2-A84A-F6485359136D@isoc.org>
References: <CAMMESsyxUbrVnV71wO-+-R-xNsPagdZStouWG9UsjBamz_0yOQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMMESsyxUbrVnV71wO-+-R-xNsPagdZStouWG9UsjBamz_0yOQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=odonoghue@isoc.org;
x-originating-ip: [65.99.124.221]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: e08064f6-d37d-4825-2fde-08d6fbe10610
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(4652040)(8989299)(4534185)(4627221)(201703031133081)(201702281549075)(8990200)(5600148)(711020)(4605104)(1401327)(2017052603328)(7193020); SRVR:DM6PR06MB6347;
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DM6PR06MB6347:
x-microsoft-antispam-prvs: <DM6PR06MB6347DB9ED68C96B7808F769DC2FC0@DM6PR06MB6347.namprd06.prod.outlook.com>
x-ms-oob-tlc-oobclassifiers: OLM:7691;
x-forefront-prvs: 00826B6158
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10009020)(39840400004)(346002)(376002)(136003)(366004)(396003)(189003)(199004)(446003)(6512007)(186003)(6246003)(6916009)(33656002)(316002)(76176011)(11346002)(53936002)(236005)(5660300002)(26005)(66066001)(6436002)(229853002)(14454004)(478600001)(6486002)(6506007)(2616005)(53546011)(102836004)(7116003)(64756008)(5640700003)(71200400001)(25786009)(54896002)(73956011)(71190400001)(91956017)(8936002)(76116006)(256004)(5024004)(81156014)(14444005)(6116002)(66446008)(86362001)(99286004)(8676002)(36756003)(1730700003)(81166006)(2501003)(3846002)(3480700005)(68736007)(66556008)(2351001)(66476007)(66946007)(7736002)(2906002)(486006)(476003); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; SCL:1; SRVR:DM6PR06MB6347; H:DM6PR06MB6234.namprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:en; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1;
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: isoc.org does not designate permitted sender hosts)
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: Hru+4+INhRa5l1+YzfRX4be8tPoJJ2c99YUbLVaiT1FEXaRLGCq5LOCzERxxwRkE6LKrDl42rBBCJUMCqS0v95G2TLwAndFgyAV6ZtZb3uqlWaegmheldN1bYMAACOr9u0emCOto95arPiVKno7p2cWlYG3Qm2oX1hpH9UUTtAqAcaLCDb5Q4dYfAg8CoVYkxFgiwBb3xruf9D7QJJ8VBxbDk0Fh+z58Y5ENi65BjrCNOPOpK3yOuouGvoSTn26Zmrws7s0rq17/t3Q5k3bKeT43YaRbaXxZPQCI7COyp6zHdvevNUHMRPkdQkhg2TA09JtVzcG6ffRkgMFy/gKYvn0fzvH7UChpt+rQrIf3jiyknph+PAzYmOYaXjWaxF5+70poGKlPUHdAc1m9whzTikRXhfCq8NM/gWg2aF64lUE=
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_057BEAF4D0704EA2A84AF6485359136Disocorg_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: isoc.org
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: e08064f6-d37d-4825-2fde-08d6fbe10610
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 28 Jun 2019 15:55:20.6112 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 89f84dfb-7285-4810-bc4d-8b9b5794554f
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: odonoghue@isoc.org
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM6PR06MB6347
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wgchairs/sLdAh4Ni0ZIDURHduTRa4OJ_abM>
X-BeenThere: wgchairs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/wgchairs/>
List-Post: <mailto:wgchairs@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2019 15:55:42 -0000

This makes sense to me. I agree that the old way was broken. This makes explicit the type of conflict without attaching a subjective “how important is it” type of flag to it.

On Jun 28, 2019, at 10:27 AM, Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com<mailto:aretana.ietf@gmail.com>> wrote:

Dear WG Chairs:

As all of you know, a conflict-free IETF agenda is virtually impossible to achieve.  Yet, the Secretariat always pulls off a wonderful job in dealing with all the constraints.

The inconsistent use of priorities to indicate conflicts is an issue that comes up every time the agenda is worked on: the intent is not always clear to the Secretariat, the ADs...or sometimes even the Chairs.

To address this issue and provide Conflict Clarity, we are planning to replace the priority options with an explicit indication of the type of conflict.

- Chair Conflict: to indicate other WGs the Chairs also lead, or will be active participants in the upcoming meeting

- Technology Overlap: to indicate WGs with a related technology or a closely related charter

- Key Participant Conflict (e.g., presenter, Secretary, etc.): to indicate WGs with which key participation may overlap in the upcoming meeting

The Special Request field will continue to be available for more specific needs.  Responsible AD Conflicts are already taken into consideration.


The result will be a clear representation of the needs of each WG.  We intend for these changes to be effective in time for IETF 106.

Please reply with any comments.

Thanks!!

Alvaro (for the IESG).

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email