Subject: RE: Tao questions

From: Burke Chris-CCB007 <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2000 16:57:29 -0500

I think WGs are part of the hierarchy. IETF WG chairs have discretionary
authority and can influence outcomes (oh, sorry, was I not supposed to say
that?). The WGs that they shepherd clearly influence outcomes by serving as
the very pillars of rough consensus.

Along Don's theme, anything about the relationship between IETF and ICANN,
IMHO, belongs under koans.

If the document is called Tao, some hint at least should be given as to why.
Yes it is obscure. And maybe at this point the IETF needs more Te than Tao.
But the title is still Tao of the IETF. Tweaked for your editorial pleasure:

"Pronounced "dow", Tao means "the way" and also "to speak." It is the basic
principle behind the teachings of Lao-tse, a classical Chinese philosopher.
Lao-tse wrote "Do that which consists in taking no action, and order will
prevail." - a reminder that trying to control things actually messes them
up. Its familiar symbol is the black and white Yin-Yang circle."

Chris Burke

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	Susan R. Harris [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent:	Tuesday, July 25, 2000 5:16 PM
To:	USWG
Subject:	Tao questions

Greetings - a few questions to mull over. First, here's part of the Table
of Contents from the new draft:
        
2.2   The Hierarchy
        2.2.1 ISOC (Internet Society)
        2.2.2 Working Groups (WGs)
                2.2.2.1 WG Chairs
                2.2.2.2 Getting Things Done in the WG
        2.2.3 IESG (Internet Engineering Steering Group)
        2.2.4 IAB (Internet Architecture Board)
        2.2.5 IANA (Internet Assigned Numbers Authority)
        2.2.6 RFC Editor
        2.2.7 IETF Secretariat

Paul adopted my outline for this section, but now I'm wondering:

       - Should we add ICANN to the top of the list?

       - Do WGs fit as a part of the hierarchy? (they're not listed as
         such in the original Tao or in Donald E's version)

       - Should the RFC Editor and IETF Secretariat be included in
         the list? (They're not in the original or in Donald's.)
        
Also, can someone refresh my memory from Adelaide and tell me why the
Registration section wasn't included in the Webized Tao?  Should it be
included in the revised RFC?

Finally, a question for Paul - in the draft you included a pointer to "Why
this document is called Tao," but didn't include the text from the
original.  Did it not seem right to you:

    Pronounced "dow", Tao means "the way." It is the basic principle
    behind the teachings of Lao-tse, a Chinese master. Its familiar symbol
    is the black and white Yin-Yang circle.