Subject: Re: [Uta] [Iotops] BRSKI and IDevID (non-!)issues with draft-ietf-uta-use-san

From: "Salz, Rich" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2021 14:27:51 +0000

After Valery’s suggestion I wrote to Jeff and Peter on May 24. No reply yet, but it’s been a holiday weekend in the US.

This particular document was AD-sponsored, so perhaps Keith’s thoughts are more applicable. For WG docs, however, another aspect to consider is that the WG owns the doc, the Chairs can pick any authors they like, and so I think his point boils down to common courtesy. Which, to be clear, is important.

---

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2021 11:24:36 -0400

On 6/1/21 10:27 AM, Salz, Rich wrote:

> After Valery’s suggestion I wrote to Jeff and Peter on May 24. No 
> reply yet, but it’s been a holiday weekend in the US.
>
> This particular document was AD-sponsored, so perhaps Keith’s thoughts 
> are more applicable. For WG docs, however, another aspect to consider 
> is that the WG owns the doc, the Chairs can pick any authors they 
> like, and so I think his point boils down to common courtesy. Which, 
> to be clear, is important.
>
I mostly agree that this is just courtesy and common sense, given the 
realities of collaborating on a difficult and complex document.

But I'll also say that I do not think the Chairs should be considered to 
have the power to pick any authors they like.   This is something that 
is properly left to WG consensus.  In other words, there should be no 
presumption that a particular document will emerge as the WG's consensus 
output, nor that particular authors/editors will write/edit that 
document.   While I think that WGs often benefit from having a sense of 
direction provided by Chairs and/or ADs, I don't think the Chairs or ADs 
should be imposing such decisions on WGs.    I admit it's a fine line.

(And I say this as a former WG chair who did once put his hand on the 
scale in that way; in hindsight, I don't think I should have done that.)

Keith