fwiw I agree. There is no reference to IASA in 2418, for obvious reasons. >From a practical point of view, any terminology issue could be handled as an erratum with disposition "wait for update". Regards Brian On 2018-10-21 09:18, John C Klensin wrote: > Hi. > > For whatever it is worth, I've very concerned about the IASA2 > effort sliding over into replacement of fundamental process > documents. RFC 2418, like 2026, is showing its age. If we are > going to revise it, it seems to me that there is a very good > case for a comprehensive comparison of actual practices today > with the text and document revisions as appropriate and not > publishing a new document in which descriptions of obsolete > practices are repeated. > > As one example among many, the BOF description of 2418 still > discusses the decision to hold a BOF as one that can be made by > a single AD while today's procedure involves formal applications > on a community-wide schedule, IAB and IESG review, etc. We've > also relaxed the "only once or possibly a second time but never > three" rule. > > As another, RFC 2418 calls for explicit disclosure of conflicts > of interest but points to RFC 2028/ BCP 11 which, AFAICT, only > discusses IPR rights. In today's Internet and IETF, that would > seem to call for some review and perhaps some comments about AD > <-> WG Chair relationships. And, as a third, at the time 2418 > was written, saying that we do things by rough consensus was > adequate (or at least believed to be adequate). Today, we've > got RFC 7282, which should probably be referenced, and a > collection of other documents and procedures that interact > significantly with how WGs do their work, how people > participate, and how conclusions are reached. > > Those are not the only examples. > > Most of those are not huge issues, but it does not seem > appropriate to issue a document that replaces / obsoletes 2418 > without addressing them (and several others). > > In addition, replacing fundamental IETF process documents > appears to be clearly outside the scope of the IASA2 effort. > The last paragraph of the WG charter begins: > > "Aside from instances where they presently relate to > IASA, it is outside the scope of this working group to > consider any changes to anything related to the > oversight or steering of the standards process as > currently conducted by the IESG and IAB,...". > > The only sense in which this work "presently relates to IASA" is > the title of the IETF Executive Director. The I-D affirms that > by listing that as the only non-"insignificant" change from > 2418. The new term appears exactly once in this draft and the > old one appeared exactly once in 2418. It might make sense to > completely replace 2418 if it appeared many times and was > tightly woven in the text, but it isn't. > > FWIW, there are also a number of (other) obsolete references or > missing references in this I-D. Given that they authors have > not found and fixed them by -01, getting them out presumably > implies extra work for them and the community. > > I strongly suggest that, > > -- to avoid reissuing a fundamental process document and > thereby explicitly reaffirming procedures and mechanisms > that do not precisely align with current practices, > -- to avoid creating confusion about the status of every > document that references these old process documents, > -- to avoid the risks of a supposedly insignificant > change actually having some substantive consequences, > and > -- to reduce the number of documents and page count > coming out of the IASA2 WG and process so the community > can concentrate on reviewing changes that actually are > important, > > this I-D and any others for which the changes to the relevant > base documents are limited to updating a title (or something > equally trivial) be replaced by a single "IASA2-related > terminology update" draft that simply lists the replacement > terms and the documents that are updated to reflect them. I > haven't made a careful study, but it appears to me after quick > glances that a "gather together into one document and update > only the terminology" model could include 3005bis, possibly > 4844bis, and perhaps others. > > john > > > --On Saturday, October 20, 2018 09:47 -0700 > internet-drafts@xxxxxxxx wrote: > >> >> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line >> Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the >> IETF Administrative Support Activity 2 WG of the IETF. >> >> Title : IETF Working Group Guidelines and >> Procedures Authors : Scott Bradner >> Rich Salz >> Filename : draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc2418bis-01.txt >> Pages : 27 >> Date : 2018-10-20 >> >> Abstract: >> The Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) has >> responsibility for developing and reviewing specifications >> intended as Internet Standards. IETF activities are >> organized into working groups (WGs). This document >> describes the guidelines and procedures for formation and >> operation of IETF working groups. It also describes the formal >> relationship between IETF participants WG and the Internet >> Engineering Steering Group (IESG) and the basic duties of >> IETF participants, including WG Chairs, WG participants, >> and IETF Area Directors. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > iasa20 mailing list > iasa20@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/iasa20 >
