John, On 2012-05-31 16:19, John C Klensin wrote: ... > Assuming Paul isn't planning to get this published as an RFC and > then immediately retire from the IETF and that we don't have a > delusion that this document will not need to be maintained and > updated as things change, I propose the following: > > (1) Establish the Tao as a modified Wiki, complete with live > HTML links to relevant documents and other relevant > discussions.. Provide some mechanism for comments to the editor > or even discussion that works better than the RFC Errata > process. Turn maintenance of that page over to a volunteer or > two (ideally someone young enough to learn a lot from the > process) or the Secretariat. Before someone says "cost", > please calculate the costs to the community of an extended Last > Call in which people debate details of wording. +- some trivia such as avoiding the fuzziness of a wiki, isn't that what http://www.ietf.org/tao.html already achieves? I tend to agree with your suggestions below. Brian > > (2) Appoint Paul as chair of an editorial committee with zero or > more additional members to be appointed at his discretion > subject to advice and consent of the IESG. That committee gets > to consider whether to make changes. If they get it wrong, they > are subject to the community's normal forms of abuse and, in > principle, appeals. That could add a bit of work for the IESG > but I suggest only a bit and less than running a Last Call. > > (3) Replace/ obsolete RFC 4677 by a document modeled on RFC > 5000. I.e., it should explain why we are maintaining the Tao as > one or more web pages and should provide a durable pointer to > how the web page can be found. > > just my opinion, > john > >