Subject: please double-check your charters

From: Lars Eggert <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 23:01:41 +0900

Hi,

we just found another case of a WG (DCCP) where the charter text was  
rolled back to some (much) earlier version during the IETF web site  
migration. I suggest that you take a quick look at your charters to  
double-check that they say what they should be saying.

Lars

PS: The milestones were OK, it was the actual charter text that was  
outdated.

---

From: Ben Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 10:37:19 -0500

SIMPLE is clearly hosed. How do we go about fixing it?

---

From: "David Harrington" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 12:15:43 -0400

Hi,

I checked the syslog page and found that the tools.ietf.org charter
link showed an older version than the 
http://www.ietf.org/dyn/wg/charter/syslog-charter page (which you get
if you click on "current charter" from the tools.ietf.org page.

Henrik is investigating.

I think you probably need to pay attention to which page you check,
and report which URL is out of date.
On the other hand, they already know there is a problem, so sending
lots of reports of the same problem won't be that helpful. So you
might to check to see if you have th eproblem, and then give them a
few days to fix it, and check again later.

dbh 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] 
> [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Ben Campbell
> Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 11:37 AM
> To: Lars Eggert
> Cc: Working Group Chairs
> Subject: Re: please double-check your charters
>

---

From: Ben Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 12:46:54 -0500

SIMPLE has the charter wrong on both the tools page and the "current  
official charter" page.

---

From: Lars Eggert <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 04:27:11 +0900

Hi,

some far DCCP. Moreover, the dated links on top of the tools page are  
also confused. The more current versions (the ones having "is  
maintaining" in the first line rather than "is chartered") are dated  
from 2006...

(And I can't tell which one is the actual current one because after  
the massive recharter from design to maintenance mode - reflected in  
the wording change above and many other changes - I believe we did  
some minor rechartering.)

Lars

---

From: Yaakov Stein <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 08:38:58 +0200

I just checked the TICTOC charter at http://www.ietf.org/dyn/wg/charter/tictoc-charter.html
vs the one at http://tools.ietf.org/wg/tictoc/charters.

The text seems the same, but the tools version starts rather unauspiciously 
as follows :

2009-09-04 charter
<![endif]-->

Y(J)S

---

From: Jari Arkko <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 10:51:05 +0300

We saw a few problems with this in INT WGs earlier on (all fixed to my 
knowledge, but I have not made a full check of every WG). I have not 
seen the bug that Henrik fixed, only issues with the actual database 
contents missing an update that we had done earlier.

(And shouldn't we all be updating our charters now and then anyway... 
this might be a good opportunity to remove that no-longer-interesting 
cruft from your charter and replace it with the stuff that you really 
are working on. Not to mention updates to your milestones :-) Talk to 
your ADs.)

Jari

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:10:02 +0200

Hi Lars,

On 2009-10-14 21:27 Lars Eggert said the following:
> also confused.

The dated links simply reflect when there was a change in what was pulled
from the database.  I've been saving the www.ietf.org/ietf/1wg-charters.txt
file multiple times per day since 2006-07-03, and the individual WG charter
history is based on that.

As far as I can tell from the additional information you provide below, the
restore after the outage on 2008-02-05 reverted to the old 2006 'is chartered'
version.

> The more current versions (the ones having "is  

Could it be that the minor rechartering changed only milestones?  I only
recently started including the milestone information in the snapshots you
see on http://tools.ietf.org/wg/dccp/charters.

If so, the charter text from 2006-12-29 should be the correct one (no
changes were seen during 2007) and hopefully the milestones from the
2009-10-14 snapshot are correct.  If the milestones are hopelessly wrong,
let me know, and I can produce all the changes since 2006-07-03, including
milestone and document information (which I excluded from the charters
history because it makes it much harder to find actual charter changes
when 90% of the changes occur in the lists of internet-drafts and RFCs.

Regards,

	Henrik

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 12:04:32 +0200

Hi Yaakov,

> The text seems the same, but the tools version starts rather unauspiciously 

Oops.  Fixed in the master script, should be fixed in all pages within an
hour.  (This doesn't show in my Firefox or Safari, so I hadn't noticed it
when it appeared as a result of some changes in the draft html markup code
which I also run on the charter text.)

Regards,

	Henrik

---

From: "Phelan, Tom" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 10:15:36 -0400

Hi Henrik,

The milestones on what's currently shown for the DCCP charter
(http://www.ietf.org/dyn/wg/charter/dccp-charter.html and the tools
page) are wrong.  They seem to be a combination of old and new
milestones, and I'm not sure they include all of the current milestones.

Tom P.

> From: Henrik Levkowetz [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 5:10 AM
> To: Lars Eggert
> Cc: Ben Campbell; David Harrington; Working Group Chairs; dccp-
> [email-masked]
> As far as I can tell from the additional information you provide
below,
> the

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 17:37:55 +0200

Hi Tom,

> milestones, and I'm not sure they include all of the current milestones.

You can now see a complete list of all the charter changes, including 
trivial routine changes in internet-drafts, at the bottom of the charters
page for dccp: http://tools.ietf.org/wg/dccp/charters .  I hope that can
help you work out the correct current milestones, so the secretariat can
be notified.

Regards,

	Henrik

---

From: "David Harrington" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 11:49:20 -0400

Henrik,

Thank you for your work at resolving what appears to be multiple
problems.
I think it is wonderful how much more information is available about
charter changes than used to exist.

dbh

> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 11:38 AM
> To: Phelan, Tom
> Cc: Lars Eggert; Ben Campbell; David Harrington; Working 
> Group Chairs; [email-masked]
> >>> some far DCCP. Moreover, the dated links on top of the tools
page
> > are
> >>> also confused.
> >> The dated links simply reflect when there was a change in what
was
> > pulled
> >> file multiple times per day since 2006-07-03, and the individual
WG
> >> charter
> >> restore after the outage on 2008-02-05 reverted to the old 2006
'is
> >> chartered'
> >> Could it be that the minor rechartering changed only milestones?
I
> > only
> >> recently started including the milestone information in 
> the snapshots
> > you
> >> 2009-10-14 snapshot are correct.  If the milestones are
hopelessly
> > wrong,
> >>>>> http://www.ietf.org/dyn/wg/charter/syslog-charter page 
> (which you
> > get
> >>>>> might to check to see if you have th eproblem, and then 
> give them
> > a

---

From: Henrik Levkowetz <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 19:29:59 +0200

> charter changes than used to exist.

Thanks :-)

Best,

	Henrik

---

From: Eric Rescorla <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2009 16:30:42 -0700

It sounds like there is a systemic problem here, but I'm not sure it's  
really the chairs job to fix it. Afaict recharters are posted to ietf- 
announce so why can't the secretariat just make sure that the site  
matches the latest version

Ekr

---

From: Lars Eggert <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 09:38:38 +0300

Hi,

> matches the latest version

agreed, and I already sent in a ticket asking them to do just that.

But I think I remember the secretariat claiming that they had done  
this after we found the first such case a few months ago, and  
apparently some cases slipped through.

Lars

---

From: Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 11:07:27 +0200

Russ will discuss this issue with the AMS people to figure out if they
can check it or not. It is not obvious that they have the information
available so that they can verify what the correct text should be.

Magnus

Lars Eggert skrev:
> But I think I remember the secretariat claiming that they had done this
> after we found the first such case a few months ago, and apparently some
> cases slipped through.
> 
> Lars

-- 

Magnus Westerlund

IETF Transport Area Director
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6                | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: [email-masked]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Eric Rescorla <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 06:19:27 -0700

> available so that they can verify what the correct text should be.

Uh, why not? Isn't it posted to ietf-announce when approved?

-Ekr

---

From: Alexa Morris <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 17:40:49 -0700

To close the loop on this, I want to make sure that everyone is aware  
of the actions that AMS took here.

On Friday and yesterday, Cindy checked the 121 active working group  
charters by combing through the IETF-Announce archives. She discovered  
that:

- 6 did not match the most recent WG Action message (she updated these)
- 2 more that did not match had been caught and fixed last week
- 16 did not appear to have a WG Action message in the IETF-Announce  
archives (so she contacted the appropriate AD to ask them to review  
the website for accuracy)
- 97 of WGs appeared to have the correct charter text

In addition, our IT department verified that the charters are being  
updated correctly here and that any issue with them being updated  
improperly appears to be an old one, even if it was only recently  
discovered.

If anyone has remaining questions, please feel free to contact me.

Alexa

On Oct 15, 2009, at 4:30 PM, Eric Rescorla wrote:

> It sounds like there is a systemic problem here, but I'm not sure  
> it's really the chairs job to fix it. Afaict recharters are posted  
> to ietf-announce so why can't the secretariat just make sure that  
> the site matches the latest version
>
> Ekr
>
>> we just found another case of a WG (DCCP) where the charter text  
>> was rolled back to some (much) earlier version during the IETF web  
>> site migration. I suggest that you take a quick look at your  
>> charters to double-check that they say what they should be saying.
>>
>> Lars
>>

-----------
Alexa Morris / Executive Director / IETF
48377 Fremont Blvd., Suite 117, Fremont, CA  94538
Phone: +1.510.492.4089 / Fax: +1.510.492.4001
Email: [email-masked]

Managed by Association Management Solutions (AMS)
Forum Management, Meeting and Event Planning
www.amsl.com <http://www.amsl.com/>

---

From: Lars Eggert <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 10:56:49 +0300

Hi,

On 2009-10-21, at 3:40, Alexa Morris wrote:
> charters by combing through the IETF-Announce archives.

thank you very much!

> She discovered that:

Could you let us all (or at least the chairs/ADs involved) know which  
WGs those were?

> - 97 of WGs appeared to have the correct charter text

Was only the charter text checked, or also the milestones? (I believe  
that the DCCP chairs found that their milestones were also corrupted  
somehow.)

Thanks again,
Lars

---

From: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 09:48:09 -0500

Alexa,

Thanks for doing this checking - I'm running from teleconference to draft 
editing session during the week before ID submission cutoff, so this wasn't 
going to happen this week for my working group if checking was up to me, and 
I suspect I'm not the only chair who's similarly running...

Spencer

> To close the loop on this, I want to make sure that everyone is aware  of 
> the actions that AMS took here.
>
> archives (so she contacted the appropriate AD to ask them to review  the 
> website for accuracy)
>> really the chairs job to fix it. Afaict recharters are posted  to 
>> ietf-announce so why can't the secretariat just make sure that  the site

---

From: Cindy Morgan <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 10:23:31 -0700

Please see in-line.

> On 2009-10-21, at 12:45 AM, Lars Eggert wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Could you let us all (or at least the chairs/ADs involved) know  
>> which WGs those were?

The 8 affected working groups were:

- 16NG
- ADSLMIB
- DCCP
- FECFRAME
- ROHC
- SIMPLE
- SMIME
- TCPM

To clarify what Alexa said above, for the 6 that were discovered  
during the audit, the AD for the group was contacted and asked to  
review both the web charter and the WG Action message and let me know  
which was correct.  So far, in all of these cases it has been the WG  
Action message that was correct, and the charters on the web have been  
fixed accordingly.  At this point, SMIME is the only one that has not  
been fixed, as I'm waiting to hear back from the AD.

>> Was only the charter text checked, or also the milestones? (I  
>> believe that the DCCP chairs found that their milestones were also  
>> corrupted somehow.)

Only the charter text ("Description of Working Group") was checked.   
Since milestones can be updated at any time without sparking a new WG  
Action message, there unfortunately isn't really a reliable way to  
check the milestones on the web charter against anything else.  FWIW,  
other parts of the charter, like the listing of WG Chairs, Area  
Directors, Technical Advisors, etc. appear not to have been affected.

Best regards,
Cindy