Subject: Re: [Tsv-art] do we need a checklist or guidelines?

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2017 09:16:58 -0500

So, I kept meaning to read through this thread when I had time, and kept
not having time ... until now.

On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 9:27 AM, Joe Touch <[email-masked]> wrote:

>
>
> On 7/20/2017 5:22 AM, Mirja Kuehlewind (IETF) wrote:
> > Hi Joe,
> >
> > I would say that the points under c) are usually already discussed and
> considered in the IETF (in tcpm where we sooner or later have all these
> proposals presented at least once). However, I don’t see a need to further
> formalize anything here because I don’t see how this could help.
> >
> > I also think that „attack“ is really not the right word here. People are
> free and should be encouraged to bring their idea to the IETF/tcpm and then
> have a discussion with the experts there figuring out if their proposed
> solution is the right approach or if there are other better alternatives.
> Just trying to send these people away doesn’t help.
> The issue is similar to security considerations, congestion issues with
> UDP, etc - the community *is* extending and adapting TCP and certainly
> we're providing feedback, but that feedback would be a lot more
> efficient if the community knew what our expectations were, IMO.
>
> Especially when some of these requests for transport analysis happen in
> days/hours before IESG review, as is too often the case.
>

If I might add one thought ...

When Martin was still an AD, he and I (and some of the folks who are now
serving on TSV-ART, of course) were working on
https://trac.ietf.org/trac/tsv/wiki/tsvdir-common-issues, which was
intended to be helpful for people performing transport reviews (then
TSV-DIR, now TSV-ART), and we did a fairly extensive rework just before
Martin stepped down, and then I've been kind of scrolling past this item on
our weekly coordination spreadsheet since Mirja became an AD - but it has
been on the TSV AD coordination spreadsheet since 2014!

So, I suspect that

   - what Joe is talking about, could reasonably be added to that checklist
   (there's already a section on Use of UDP, and that needs a minor update to
   point to RFC 8085), in the spirit of what Joe said about telling the
   community what our expectations are, and
   - it's long past time for Spencer to talk with Mirja about any other
   changes that we need to make to the checklist, which I'm betting at least
   some of the TSV-ART members don't know about, much less the rest of the
   community, and
   - it would be a good thing for us to publish that checklist in a visible
   place and announce it for the community.

Does that make sense to other people?

And, Joe, thanks for nudging me to do the right thing.

Spencer

> Joe
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tsv-art mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tsv-art
>