Re: Fwd: BoF Proposal for IETF Procedures discussion

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



At 2:25 PM -0500 1/27/08, Russ Housley wrote:
This just came in. I think it is rushed, but there really many need to be a venue to discuss the issues that have been raised by the Last Call of draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes.

Without a venue, I'm not sure how any progress can be made. There are certainly at least a handful of interested people, which means that Internet Drafts will probably continue to be produced and discussed. That handful of people certainly don't agree on major issues, and the recent discussion has shown.

This BoF could act as a catalyst for discussion on the viability of changing the IETF procedures. Topics would include:

- Which parts of RFC 2026 can be easily updated?

- Which parts of RFC 2026 are so contentious that discussion of them is not fruitful in the near future?

- Which other IETF procedural documents have parts that can be easily updated?

- Should this discussion be held in a WG? If not, who will decide when proposed changes are ready for IESG review, and what criteria should they use?

That last one seems to be the crux of the issue. Without a manager of the control plane, all the data coming at the IESG and IAB will be un-prioritized.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]