Subject: [lisp] LISP WG changes after Hiroshima

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 19:29:48 +0900

You may remember that in September I got several complaints about the 
working group. I have continued to track the situation. Some amount of 
controversy is expected in any working group, and there will always be 
heated discussions in any group. For instance, contributors with 
different plans to deploy or implement the technology may legitimately 
have different requirements. Resolving these differences in a balanced 
way is the key to producing a high quality specification.

However, to manage this process it is essential that I have a team of 
chairs and editors that work well together, trust each other, and want 
to work together. I do not say this lightly, but unfortunately, I no 
longer believe we have that in this working group.

To be clear, I still believe the fundamentals of the working group are 
good. There are implementations. There are interested WG participants. 
This is important work, and we should publish a set of Experimental RFCs 
as planned next year. Producing those RFCs requires effort but will 
ultimately pay off in the form of a high quality spec. And we need to 
learn everything we can about this technology and how it works in 
practice. I also have the highest trust in everyone both in the 
chair/editor team and in the working group at large. Everyone is trying 
to do the right thing.

Given that the fundamentals are right, I am making some changes in an 
attempt to create an environment where the group can move forward again. 
Here's what we are going to do:

1. After Hiroshima, I will assign new chairs and find a new editor for 
the base specification. (The current authors of the base document will 
naturally remain as authors and active contributors.)

2. Going towards Anaheim, one of the tasks of the working group is to 
form a common understanding of the deployment scenarios. This 
understanding will help the group make protocol design decisions. I see 
that Darrel and Margaret have already agreed to lead a discussion about 
this on Thursday - good.

Sam, Darrel, and Dino: I apologize for the situation. I blame myself for 
this more than anyone else; I should have seen this coming when we set 
the working group up. I appreciate the fact that you have all promised 
to continue pursuing work in the LISP WG as key contributor, author, 
inventor, and implementor roles, despite this being a painful situation. 
Thank you for the hard work you've done so far and what you will do in 
the future.

Feedback on this plan, nominations and self-nominations for new chairs 
and editors, and other suggestions are appreciated. There will be a 
brief slot in the Thursday's meeting to discuss this as well.

Jari Arkko
Area Director for the LISP WG

---

From: vijay gill <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 13:48:25 +0900

On Mon, Nov 9, 2009 at 7:29 PM, Jari Arkko <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Feedback on this plan, nominations and self-nominations for new chairs and
> editors, and other suggestions are appreciated. There will be a brief slot
> in the Thursday's meeting to discuss this as well.

Speaking purely in my individual capacity, I would like to nominate
Darrel Lewis and Terry Manderson as WG chairs.

/vijay

> _______________________________________________
> lisp mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
>