Subject: Becoming better at evaluating and chartering new work proposals (was: Re: BOF into WG...)

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 11:58:01 +0000

Speaking as only 1/15th of the ADs, who may need more diet coke before
making sense ...

On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Russ Housley <[email-masked]> wrote:

> We hoping to add a replaced-by feature to the datatracker to help people
> track these name changes.  The tools team is looking for a volunteer to
> write the code...
>

The other minor point is that
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2418#section-2.4 is still the relevant BCP,
and has an absolute prohibition against approving a third BOF.

Some BOF proponents have an incentive to change names, to route around that
blockage.

Other BOF proponents have an incentive to change names, if a BOF was not
approved, and then resubmitted with a significant scope change.

One might wonder whether that's reflecting reality or just improving the
marketing layer of the protocol stack.

We could talk, as a community, about whether we're making the "where did
this start out?" problem worse than it needs to be.

We could also talk, as a community, about why
https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2418#section-2.4 thinks second BOFs are
exceptional, but one can look through the history on
https://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/wiki and think about how often we
create a WG with only one BOF, or without a BOF at all.

I'm stepping down from the IESG next March, no chance of not, and would
LOVE for us to be better at getting new work proposals evaluated and, one
hopes, chartered when that is the right thing to happen, before I step
down. I've thought that was the most important part of my job since I
joined the IAB in 2010, and I'm trying ...

But I'm speaking only for myself on this, of course.

You can speak for yourself here, or accost me in the hallway, or accost
your AD of choice, whether via hallway or e-mail.

Spencer

> Russ
>
>
> > On Mar 19, 2018, at 6:07 AM, Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I was looking for the ANIMA, IETF-90 (Toronto) slides.
> > IETF91 was the earliest... aha, it was a BOF in Toronto... and finally
> > I realized it was called UCAN when it was a BOF.
> >
> > Is there some reason why we do not keep the same database entry
> > so that BOF materials that lead to a WG can be seen on the materials
> > and agenda page for the WG?
> >
> > If there is some reason the same entry is not kept, is there some
> pointer on
> > the WG status page that points to the BOF that I've missed?
>

---

From: Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 17:05:17 +0000

>     We hoping to add a replaced-by feature to the datatracker to help
    > people track these name changes.  The tools team is looking for a
    > volunteer to write the code...

    > The other minor point is
    > that https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2418#section-2.4 is still the
    > relevant BCP, and has an absolute prohibition against approving a third
    > BOF. 

...

    > We could also talk, as a community, about
    > why https://tools.ietf.org/html/ rfc2418#section-2.4 thinks second BOFs
    > are exceptional, but one can look through the history
    > on https://trac.tools.ietf.org/bof/trac/wiki and think about how often
    > we create a WG with only one BOF, or without a BOF at all. 

the best work around is to have lunch-time BarBOFs.

They get meetecho support, projectors, and all the like, but aren't BOFs.
It screws with schedules, and unless we are going to do something like
limit everyone to 1hr to get more slots with fewer conflicts, then we
might as want to remove the third BOF limit.

    > LOVE for us to be better at getting new work proposals evaluated and,
    > one hopes, chartered when that is the right thing to happen, before I
    > step down. I've thought that was the most important part of my job
    > since I joined the IAB in 2010, and I'm trying ...

I think that the IAB BOF mentoring process has been doing a very good job.

I think we might want to make it easier to re-open a WG.

--
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        | network architect  [
]     [email-masked]  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [

--
Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-