From exim@www1.ietf.org Fri Mar 5 20:14:28 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA09619 for ; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 20:14:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AzQO7-0006LZ-Oi for mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 05 Mar 2004 20:13:59 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i261Dx9W024391 for mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 20:13:59 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AzQO7-0006LK-K1 for mpowr-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 05 Mar 2004 20:13:59 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA09613 for ; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 20:13:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AzQO5-0000ph-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 05 Mar 2004 20:13:57 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AzQN6-0000gk-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 05 Mar 2004 20:12:56 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AzQMB-0000Xc-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Fri, 05 Mar 2004 20:11:59 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AzQMC-0006FU-Kd; Fri, 05 Mar 2004 20:12:00 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AzQMA-0006FE-Vh for mpowr@optimus.ietf.org; Fri, 05 Mar 2004 20:11:58 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id UAA09579 for ; Fri, 5 Mar 2004 20:11:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AzQM8-0000XE-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Fri, 05 Mar 2004 20:11:56 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AzQLA-0000Nv-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Fri, 05 Mar 2004 20:10:56 -0500 Received: from sccrmhc12.comcast.net ([204.127.202.56]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AzQKD-00006U-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Fri, 05 Mar 2004 20:09:57 -0500 Received: from dfnjgl21 (unknown[210.93.162.119]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc12) with SMTP id <2004030601092301200eir77e> (Authid: sdawkins@comcast.net); Sat, 6 Mar 2004 01:09:23 +0000 Message-ID: <021c01c40317$acbe72b0$f1e425da@DFNJGL21> Reply-To: "Spencer Dawkins" From: "Spencer Dawkins" To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20040211102507.04190e40@ms101.mail1.com> Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 10:09:26 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: [mpowr] Attagirl on draft-wasserman-rfc2418-ml-update-00.txt, and a couple of corner cases... Sender: mpowr-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mpowr-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mpowr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Management Positions -- Oversight, Work and Results List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I thought this draft captured the mailing list thoughts well, and the capability does matter. To move it forward, I thought about a few corner cases. I'll try to separate my questions from my suggested answers, so please make sure that each question matters before thinking about my answers, OK? - we had mentioned the possibility that a WG chair suspends someone for 30 days, and on the 31st day, they return just the way they left before suspension. If someone was disruptive six months ago, is suspended for a month, behaves for five months, and then returns to bad habits (I could easily see this happening during a document last call), can the working group chair take action as before? spencer: the draft doesn't include the notion of "memory". My suggestion is that the second incident is also suspendable, but that a second suspension from a single working group mailing list is automatically appealed to IESG (the way US capital punishment cases are automatically appealed), so that the broader community can rule on the WG chair's judgement without waiting for a telechat or two to roll around. - I thought there was community support for the idea that ADs don't chair working groups in their own areas, but a number of area directors are still WG chairs today, and most of the process mailing lists (MPOWR, ICAR, others?) were initiated by ADs. We also have WGs like TSVWG where both WG chairs are also TSV ADs. All of these WGs should be able to protect their own mailing lists, but the "in consultation with the responsible Area Director" doesn't seem to parse well, if the goal was to guard against individual capriciousness. spencer: my suggestion is to allow the AD/WG chairs the same ability that non-AD WG chairs would have. If we're concerned about abuse, the potential for abuse, or the perception of abuse, suspensions in these cases could also be automatically appealed. - IETF also hosts non-WG mailing lists, for example, trigtran@ietf.org. Can a BoF chair, for instance, do the same thing as a WG chair? spencer: my suggestion is to allow BoF chairs the same tools with the same restrictions. Since the whole point of a BoF is to form a community, mailing list disruption seems especially DoSish for BoF mailing lists. - I'm really confused about what applies to ietf@ietf.org, since there's only one General Area Director. spencer: I'll ignore this for now. - it seems implicit that all of the disruptive postings remain in the mailing list archives unless they are illegal (posting child porn, etc.). Should this be explicit? spencer: I would think so. Again, thank you, Margaret, for moving this forward. Spencer ----- Original Message ----- From: "Margaret Wasserman" To: Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 12:26 AM Subject: [mpowr] Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-wasserman-rfc2418-ml-update-00.txt > > FYI -- > > I attempted to capture our mailing list discussions in a (very > short) draft. Feedback will be appreciated. > > Margaret _______________________________________________ mpowr mailing list mpowr@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Mar 6 18:20:32 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA10079 for ; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 18:20:32 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Azl5R-0001Kc-3x for mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 18:20:05 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i26NK4UG005108 for mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 18:20:04 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Azl5P-0001KA-DB for mpowr-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 18:20:03 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA10032 for ; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 18:19:58 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Azl5M-0003y8-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 18:20:00 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Azl4N-0003of-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 18:19:00 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Azl3P-0003g4-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 18:17:59 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Azl3R-0000jW-8y; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 18:18:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Azl3Q-0000j2-9v for mpowr@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 18:18:00 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA09937 for ; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 18:17:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Azl3N-0003fZ-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 18:17:57 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Azl2O-0003WR-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 18:16:57 -0500 Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([158.38.152.233]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Azl1X-0003G2-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 18:16:03 -0500 Received: from halvestr-w2k1 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0943F61C16; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 00:15:31 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2004 15:00:20 -0800 From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand To: Spencer Dawkins , mpowr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpowr] Attagirl on draft-wasserman-rfc2418-ml-update-00.txt, and a couple of corner cases... Message-ID: <217800650.1078585220@localhost> In-Reply-To: <021c01c40317$acbe72b0$f1e425da@DFNJGL21> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20040211102507.04190e40@ms101.mail1.com> <021c01c40317$acbe72b0$f1e425da@DFNJGL21> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.0 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpowr-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mpowr-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mpowr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Management Positions -- Oversight, Work and Results List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --On 6. mars 2004 10:09 +0900 Spencer Dawkins wrote: > - I'm really confused about what applies to ietf@ietf.org, since > there's only one General Area Director. ietf@ietf.org has its own set of rules - RFC 3005. I think the answer here should be approximately the same as for IETF non-WG mailing lists (whatever that answer is), but until the draft says that it wants to update RFC 3005, I'm happy to leave ietf@ietf.org alone! Harald _______________________________________________ mpowr mailing list mpowr@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Mar 6 19:04:37 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA12001 for ; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 19:04:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Azlm8-0004JX-0C for mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 19:04:12 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i2704BVD016582 for mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 19:04:11 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Azlm6-0004JM-9H for mpowr-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 19:04:11 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA11970 for ; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 19:03:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Azllu-00031E-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 19:03:58 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Azlku-0002q0-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 19:02:57 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Azljz-0002bZ-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 19:01:59 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Azlk1-0004Ej-H7; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 19:02:01 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Azljv-0004EX-N6 for mpowr@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 19:01:55 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id TAA11732 for ; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 19:01:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Azljs-0002VI-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 19:01:52 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Azlif-0002DC-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 19:00:37 -0500 Received: from sccrmhc13.comcast.net ([204.127.202.64]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Azlhk-0001vO-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 18:59:40 -0500 Received: from dfnjgl21 (c-24-1-97-129.client.comcast.net[24.1.97.129]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc13) with SMTP id <2004030623590501600ghv3ae> (Authid: sdawkins@comcast.net); Sat, 6 Mar 2004 23:59:06 +0000 Message-ID: <00b201c403d7$05b163e0$0400a8c0@DFNJGL21> Reply-To: "Spencer Dawkins" From: "Spencer Dawkins" To: References: <5.1.0.14.2.20040211102507.04190e40@ms101.mail1.com> <021c01c40317$acbe72b0$f1e425da@DFNJGL21> <217800650.1078585220@localhost> Subject: Re: [mpowr] Attagirl on draft-wasserman-rfc2418-ml-update-00.txt, and a couple of corner cases... Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 08:59:11 +0900 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpowr-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mpowr-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mpowr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Management Positions -- Oversight, Work and Results List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Dear Harald, Ah, thank you for the pointer. I think I still have a similar question about anything like http://eikenes.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/solutions, which started out as "not an official IETF activity" but now seems to be at least a little bit more official - if it's "intended for general discussion of IETF process changes to deal with the issues documented by the IETF "problem" WG", I would think that the General AD would be the likely person to suspend posting privileges. And I think someone should be able to suspend posting privileges if necessary for mailing lists like Solutions. Does it seem so to you? Thanks, Spencer ----- Original Message ----- From: "Harald Tveit Alvestrand" To: "Spencer Dawkins" ; Sent: Sunday, March 07, 2004 8:00 AM Subject: Re: [mpowr] Attagirl on draft-wasserman-rfc2418-ml-update-00.txt, and a couple of corner cases... > > > --On 6. mars 2004 10:09 +0900 Spencer Dawkins wrote: > > > - I'm really confused about what applies to ietf@ietf.org, since > > there's only one General Area Director. > > ietf@ietf.org has its own set of rules - RFC 3005. I think the answer here > should be approximately the same as for IETF non-WG mailing lists (whatever > that answer is), but until the draft says that it wants to update RFC 3005, > I'm happy to leave ietf@ietf.org alone! > > Harald > > > _______________________________________________ > mpowr mailing list > mpowr@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr _______________________________________________ mpowr mailing list mpowr@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr From exim@www1.ietf.org Sat Mar 6 23:43:37 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA18970 for ; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 23:43:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Azq83-0002v4-BI for mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 23:43:10 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i274h7W4011222 for mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 23:43:07 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Azq83-0002uv-3c for mpowr-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 23:43:07 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA18956 for ; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 23:43:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Azq81-00027Z-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 23:43:05 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Azq72-0001yv-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 23:42:04 -0500 Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Azq62-0001lY-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 23:41:02 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Azq62-0002sA-Cd; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 23:41:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1Azq5J-0002qu-1j for mpowr@optimus.ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 23:40:17 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA18884 for ; Sat, 6 Mar 2004 23:40:13 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Azq5G-0001ib-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 23:40:15 -0500 Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1Azq4I-0001aE-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 23:39:14 -0500 Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([158.38.152.233]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1Azq3U-0001JV-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Sat, 06 Mar 2004 23:38:24 -0500 Received: from halvestr-w2k1 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id F34F861B9C; Sun, 7 Mar 2004 05:37:52 +0100 (CET) Date: Sat, 06 Mar 2004 20:09:14 -0800 From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand To: Spencer Dawkins , mpowr@ietf.org Subject: Re: [mpowr] Attagirl on draft-wasserman-rfc2418-ml-update-00.txt, and a couple of corner cases... Message-ID: <2679853.1078603754@localhost> In-Reply-To: <00b201c403d7$05b163e0$0400a8c0@DFNJGL21> References: <5.1.0.14.2.20040211102507.04190e40@ms101.mail1.com> <021c01c40317$acbe72b0$f1e425da@DFNJGL21> <217800650.1078585220@localhost> <00b201c403d7$05b163e0$0400a8c0@DFNJGL21> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.0 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpowr-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mpowr-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mpowr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Management Positions -- Oversight, Work and Results List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --On 7. mars 2004 08:59 +0900 Spencer Dawkins wrote: > Dear Harald, > > Ah, thank you for the pointer. > > I think I still have a similar question about anything like > http://eikenes.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/solutions, which started > out as "not an official IETF activity" but now seems to be at least a > little bit more official - if it's "intended for general discussion of > IETF process changes to deal with the issues documented by the IETF > "problem" WG", I would think that the General AD would be the likely > person to suspend posting privileges. > > And I think someone should be able to suspend posting privileges if > necessary for mailing lists like Solutions. > > Does it seem so to you? Yes - on two counts: - I'm working on setting up an official list of "IETF-activity mailing lists that are not WGs". I believe all of the lists on this list should be under "IETF rules". - On a list that isn't listed there, the list owner is pretty much almighty; if he or she chooses to follow IETF procedures, he or she can. (The last point actually came up during the IEA BOF, which resulted in a desire to do experimental work, but NOT in an IETF WG format). Harald _______________________________________________ mpowr mailing list mpowr@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Mar 30 18:36:12 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA02604 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2004 18:36:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1B8RjE-0006YH-6i for mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 30 Mar 2004 17:29:04 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hBFIGB6D030492 for mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 13:16:11 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AVxGM-0007vc-S3 for mpowr-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 13:16:10 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA18984 for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 13:16:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AVxGF-0001wG-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 13:16:03 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AVxFh-0001vw-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 13:15:29 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AVxFP-0007fv-A8; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 13:15:11 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AVxEZ-0007Zl-Hj for mpowr@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 13:14:19 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA18930 for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 13:14:15 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AVxEX-0001v6-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 13:14:17 -0500 Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([158.38.152.233]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AVxEX-0001u5-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 13:14:17 -0500 Received: from halvestr-w2k1 (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0A1761DEA; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 19:13:43 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:00:19 -0800 From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand To: John C Klensin Cc: mpowr@ietf.org, solutions@alvestrand.no Subject: RE: [mpowr] Re: [Solutions] Further work on WG (chair) roles - MPOWRWG proposal Message-ID: <306983108.1071482419@localhost> In-Reply-To: <7450364.1071484725@r3.jck.com> References: <7450364.1071484725@r3.jck.com> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.0 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpowr-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mpowr-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mpowr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Management Positions -- Oversight, Work and Results List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit John, my own belief in this matter...... - The IESG is not capable, IN ISOLATION, of having the discussion that leads to the right changes being attempted (and, after being attempted, validated and declared a success, being done consistently by ALL ADs). - The community, whether on the IETF list, the IETF-announce list, the mythical "sum-of-all-WGs" list, the plenary or somewhere else, is capable of delivering several sorts of feedback, but not capable of having the discussion. Note the disparity between the "straw polls" in Minneapolis and the average tone of the 29 speakers at the mike. - The community, perhaps with good justification, distrusts the value of having discussion take place on relatively obscure mailing lists that do not have a publicly-reviewed charter or an identified chair. - Once you have a charter and a chair, the difference between the mechanism that we need and a working group is small enough to be academic - so there's no reason to invent a new mechanism. Note that I'm all for both new mechanisms when needed and unilateral AD action when that's the right thing - but I don't see that as a reason NOT to form a WG here. I think a WG is the Right Thing. The charter is a matter for another discussion. Harald _______________________________________________ mpowr mailing list mpowr@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr From exim@www1.ietf.org Tue Mar 30 18:37:12 2004 Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id SAA02869 for ; Tue, 30 Mar 2004 18:37:12 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1B8RjD-0006WI-DK for mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 30 Mar 2004 17:29:03 -0500 Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id hBFFd6ii001569 for mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:39:06 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AVuoL-0000P7-53 for mpowr-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:39:05 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA14120 for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:39:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AVuoI-00078Z-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:39:02 -0500 Received: from [132.151.1.19] (helo=optimus.ietf.org) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AVuoI-00078V-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:39:02 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AVuoI-0000OQ-Lq; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:39:02 -0500 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AVuoD-0000Nq-HN for mpowr@optimus.ietf.org; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:38:57 -0500 Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA14109 for ; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:38:53 -0500 (EST) Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AVuoB-00078E-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:38:55 -0500 Received: from ns.jck.com ([209.187.148.211] helo=bs.jck.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AVuoA-00078B-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:38:54 -0500 Received: from bs.jck.com ([209.187.148.211] helo=localhost.jck.com) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 1AVuo2-0008io-00; Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:38:46 -0500 Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:38:45 -0500 From: John C Klensin To: Pete Resnick , Margaret.Wasserman@nokia.com cc: mpowr@ietf.org, solutions@alvestrand.no Subject: RE: [mpowr] Re: [Solutions] Further work on WG (chair) roles - MPOWRWG proposal Message-ID: <7450364.1071484725@r3.jck.com> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.0 (Win32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: mpowr-admin@ietf.org Errors-To: mpowr-admin@ietf.org X-BeenThere: mpowr@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: Management Positions -- Oversight, Work and Results List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi. I continue to believe, and this discussion illustrates, that we are going around in circles rather than solving problems. Given the prior and long-standing IESG position that it can make any policy on processing of standards that isn't explicitly prohibited (and maybe some that are), and that any document coming out of a WG is subject to IESG approval, I suggest (again) the following: * While it may be difficult to do so, it is ultimately more reasonable to judge _IETF_ consensus on a procedural issue by surveying comments on a wide-participation list than it is to judge it from a narrowly-constituted WG, especially a WG that competes with others and is populated primarily by people who are more interested in process than in technical work. If the IESG needs a Last Call to calibrate community preferences/ consensus, the IESG is empowered (or has empowered itself) to issue a Last Call on substantially anything, at substantially any time. * Any decisions coming out of the WG will be subject to IESG approval. If the IESG does not approve, then the WG becomes a waste of time. If the IESG knows of things of which it will approve, then, if it believes there is some basis in community consensus, it is free to make the changes today. That leaves a (probably very small, IMO) area in which the IESG possibly prefers to not do something, but might be persuaded by a large community consensus. But, again, a narrow-focus WG is not the best was to demonstrate such consensus. * As Pete and others have pointed out, most of the things that a WG might decide to permit or require under this proposed charter are already within the scope of authority of a WG Chair ... assuming that the relevant AD decides to interpret the scope and authority that way. So... (1) Let's have those ADs who are enthused about transferring more authority and responsibility to WG Chairs, do it. Just make an announcement about what you are expecting WG Chairs to do and that you will rubber-stamp that action, without delay, when it gets to you as AD. If different ADs come up with slightly different details and formulas, so much the better: I agree with Melinda that most of the issues are in the substance and fine details, but we will learn far more about what is workable with a few experiments than with endless speculative debate... and we will learn it _much_ more quickly. If other ADs try to block this without good reason, write an open letter to the WG explaining the blockage (don't just put a cryptic entry into the I-D tracker) and copy the Nomcom. If one AD is seen as blocking things sufficiently, the WG membership can presumably find the recall procedures. It is time to put a stop to the endless looping on this subject. (2) The other major concern that has been voiced involves WG Chairs abusing their (possibly new-found) power. But WG Chairs serve more or less at the pleasure of ADs. An abuse can be discussed with the relevant AD (the procedures are pretty clear about that). If the AD refuses to do anything, that situation can be appealed (that is less clear from the procedures, but, IMO, it would be completely rational for the community to consider recalling any AD who said "my nit-picking reading of the procedures doesn't permit an appeal in this case, so I vote to reject it without considering the issues"). If, once we have the output from this type of experimental process, we conclude that the relevant BCPs need rewriting (as I suspect we will), that is the right time to form WGs, if needed. They will, at that point, have firm experience behind them to evaluate. But, right now, I think the criterion for forming more WGs ought to be "there is evidence that we need to do X, and we can't even try that without a change in procedures". Given the precedents of authority the IESG has claimed for itself in the past, I don't think this one meets that test. Do we think we can get more protection than that from more procedures? Personally, I doubt it. And, if the answer is "no", we have, I think, just exhausted the topic list for this proposed WG. john --On Friday, December 12, 2003 20:41 -0600 Pete Resnick wrote: >... > Chairs have plenty of authority to judge consensus now, and in > the normal course of events, that will allow them to hold a > document when there hasn't been sufficient cross-area review. > However, it won't allow them to usurp the consensus of the WG. >... _______________________________________________ mpowr mailing list mpowr@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr