Internet Architecture Board


IAB Minutes 2019-08-28

Home»Documents»Minutes»Minutes 2019»IAB Minutes 2019-08-28

Minutes of the 2019-08-28 IAB Teleconference

1. Administrivia

1.1. Attendance

  • Jari Arkko
  • Alissa Cooper (IETF Chair)
  • Stephen Farrell
  • Heather Flanagan (RSE)
  • Wes Hardaker
  • Ted Hardie (IAB Chair)
  • Christian Huitema
  • Mirja Kühlewind (IESG Liaison)
  • Erik Nordmark
  • Mark Nottingham
  • Colin Perkins (IRTF Chair)
  • Melinda Shore
  • Jeff Tantsura
  • Martin Thomson
  • Amy Vezza (Secretariat)
  • Zhenbin Li
  • Cindy Morgan (IAB Executive Administrative Manager)
  • Brian Trammell
  • Sarah Banks (Chair, RSOC)
  • Adam Roach (RSOC)
  • Portia Wenze-Danley (LLC Liaison to the RSOC)
  • Greg Wood

1.2. Agenda bash & announcements

No new items were added to the agenda.

1.3. Meeting Minutes

No meeting minutes were approved.

1.4. Action Item Review

The Action Item list was not reviewed at this meeting.

  • 2019-08-28: Sarah Banks and Ted Hardie to coordinate messages to the community, Sarah to send the RSOC SOW for the Temporary RFC Series Project Manager, community review to last two to three weeks. Ted to follow the SOW message up with a message about the long term strategic process of the next steps.
  • 2019-08-28: Leading up to the IETF Singapore Meeting (106), Heather Flanagan to work with Cindy Morgan and Ted Hardie on setting up a series of three (or so) virtual meetings to gather community feedback for the process. The virtual meetings should be spread to get the greatest number of time zones covered.
  • 2019-08-28: Ted Hardie to request a session at the Singapore IETF (106) for Heather Flanagan to chair, to discuss the process for the future of the RFC Series.

2. RSE and RFC Editor Model Next Steps (Public)

Ted Hardie introduced the topic and asked Sarah Banks to discuss the RSOC proposed SOW. Sarah Banks discussed the feedback from the community received both before and after the Montreal IETF. Based on that feedback, the RSOC proposes that an interim position called the Temporary RFC Series Project Manager to be hired to continue the day to day tactical work for the RFC Series. Sarah further noted the RSOC wanted to let the community drive the process for the next steps for a new RSE, or a new RFC Editor model.

Ted Hardie clarified that the tactical issues are different from the strategic long-term vision of the RFC series and that another issue is managing the community consensus for the model change.

Heather Flanagan noted that the Temporary RFC Series Project Manager would not be tasked with calling for community consensus. Ted agreed but asked if the community should be notified. Stephen Farrell liked the proposed RSOC SOW, and added that he believed the community would need to be notified with a review period. Possibly a working group-like approach.

Alissa Cooper said that the RSOC SOW for the Temporary RFC Series Project Manager could be sent for community review at the same time as opening the discussion with the community on the process for the evolution of the RFC model.

Martin Thomson agreed and noted some concrete ideas, and also providing a forum for community members to contribute their own ideas would be important.

Sarah Banks agreed that asking for comments on an idea would be better than asking for ideas.

Martin Thomson cautioned that the person chosen to call for consensus might be a controversial decision.

Stephen Farrell asked about a timeline for the project.

Ted Hardie noted that there might be some push back to creating an IETF-style working group from other RFC Stream Managers. If a group was convened for this purpose, it would have to solicit feedback from outside the usual sources.

There was a short discussion on whether an IETF BoF, an IAB session, or something else would be better for a session at IETF 106 in Singapore. Heather Flanagan noted she could facilitate a session at IETF 106.

Colin Perkins agreed it would be better if the session was not seen to come from one RFC Stream.

Martin Thomson asked about meetings leading up to IETF 106 to facilitate productive discussion.

Ted Hardie introduced the idea a series of virtual meetings spread out over the time zones to get the widest possible attendance was something that has been done before and might be useful in this instance. Martin agreed.

Ted Hardie summed up the possible next steps and asked if anyone had issues or concerns.

Heather Flanagan asked if someone would be available to assist in setting up virtual meetings. Ted volunteered and mentioned Cindy Morgan would also help.

Christian Huitema mentioned that finding chairs would be difficult. He wondered what body would be responsible for that (IAB, IESG, ISOC, other).

Alissa Cooper noted that it would be up to the community to decide on the process.

Sarah Banks said that she liked the idea of Heather Flanagan leading the discussion with the community for the process.

Melinda Shore agreed. She noted that the IAB and the RSOC had lost trust with the community.

Martin Thomson noted that the bigger picture related to what was in place to govern the RFC Series.

Ted Hardie summed up the action items for the group. He noted that when a group is trying to rebuild community trust, stepping back to listen is important before moving forward.

Alissa Cooper asked about the term “one to two years” in relation to the text of the latest SOW document the RSOC circulated. She thought the term was unclear and wanted the time more defined.

Sarah Banks replied the RSOC reasoned that a term of one year was likely too short, but two seemed excessive.

Alissa Cooper suggested that the SOW set a base time, and put in the possibility of ad hoc extensions and a flexible termination clause. She said this was used in the past and worked well.

Sarah Banks agreed to the text change.