Hi, > On Aug 31, 2019, at 5:54 AM, John C Klensin <john-ietf@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > (changing the subject line to try to avoid a nasty S/N problem) > > --On Saturday, August 31, 2019 10:20 +0200 Eliot Lear > <lear@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Can the Sergeant-at-Arms please not be this trigger happy? >> >> This was the focus of the discussion at the administrative >> plenary, and deserves wide attention, in part because the >> matter is urgent to close, given the limited period of time, >> and quite frankly what Sarah is asking for amounts to last >> call comments. The IETF list has always welcomed those. Do >> we really need to reopen 3005 to make that point clearer? > > Matthew, > > I wouldn't have chosen "trigger happy" as a description, but I > agree with Eliot and would go a bit further. First, as he > points out, this topic was of broad enough concern in Montreal, > and drew enough list discussion in the prior weeks, to have > dominated the administrative plenary. It is clearly of broad > concern to the community and I appreciate Eliot's comparison to > a Last Call. > > There is, however, another issue: the rfc-interest list has > traditionally focused on substantive issues with RFCs and the > RFC Series, not personnel and administrative policies. Pushing > this discussion there is inconsistent with "Discussions that > fall within the area of any working group or well established > list" because this is not clearly within the area of that list. > More important RFC 3005 clearly calls out "Discussion of IETF > administrative policies" as an appropriate posting topic and > this discussion is very much about administrative policies. > > So, please reconsider your comment and back it out. Where I > disagree with Eliot is that, if you don't consider withdrawing > your instruction appropriate, I think the appropriate action, at > least in the short term, would not be to open 3005 but to appeal > your decision. I agree with Elliot, S. Moonesamy, and John. The Sergeant-at-Arms email was ill considered and should be withdrawn. Bob > > thanks, > > john > > >> On 31 Aug 2019, at 01:09, Matthew A. Miller > <linuxwolf+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Please note that discussion on the Temporary RFC Series > Project Manager >> SOW should occur at < rfc-interest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >. As per > RFC 3005, >> the general list is appropriate unless there is a more > specific venue. >> >> Information about the list, including how to subscribe, can be > found at >> < https://www.rfc-editor.org/mailman/listinfo/rfc-interest >. >> >> >> Thank you, >> >> - Matthew A. Miller >> Sergeant-at-Arms > > > >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
