Subject: Open wgchairs mailing list?

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 09:36:06 +0200

G'day.

Working Group chairs come and go.  (I was just unsubscribed yesterday,
as part of shutting down the non-functioning arcmedia wg.)

My observation is that the contents of the wgchairs mailing list -- as
with wg chair training during the week -- typically has on-going
benefit.  That is, other than small amounts of logistical information,
the content of this mailing list would be useful for future wg chairs,
as well as current ones.

So I suggest that the list be opened to all current, past and
/potential/ chairs.  (Being on this list is a way of getting exposure to
issues about chairing and can help train folk who might become a chair,
eventually.

Thoughts?

d/

ps. please copy me explicitly, since as I say, I've been unsubscribed...

-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
wgch

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 13:17:28 +0200

Hi Dave,

> On 23 Jul 2015, at 09:36, Dave Crocker <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> G'day.
> 

Agreed. This mailing list is too big anyway to be able to form a conspiracy ;-)

---

From: Lou Berger <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 13:16:20 +0200

Good idea. Keeping past chairs on the list seems reasonable and beneficial 
to the group. Future/possible/intended/etc seems a bit too nebulous a group 
to me, so would stick with just not removing folks from the list once added...

Lou

---

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 13:22:19 +0200

For what it's worth ...

On Jul 23, 2015 13:16, "Lou Berger" <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
> Good idea. Keeping past chairs on the list seems reasonable and
beneficial to the group. Future/possible/intended/etc seems a bit too
nebulous a group to me, so would stick with just not removing folks from
the list once added...
> Lou

When I became a WG chair in the late 1990s, you had to already be a WG
chair to be invited to WG chair training.

Sometime after the EDU team was created (I think), we opened up most of the
training for WG chairs to anyone.

So, adding prospective chairs to this list would be a discussion I'd
encourage you folks to have ...

Spencer

---

From: "Joel M. Halpern" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 07:53:26 -0400

It strikes me that the quesiton is whether what we are best served by is
a working group chairs mailing list
or
a working group chairing mailing list
?

The former would be closed.  The later would be open.
And looking at the purpose, I think that we would find a list about 
chairing very useful.

Yours,
Joel

---

From: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 07:56:45 -0400

Lou says:
> Future/possible/intended/etc seems a bit too nebulous a group

> encourage you folks to have ...

Indeed.  I'll remind everyone that the archives of this list are
public, so it's just a question, really, of who can post without being
moderated.

I'll ask the questions this way, to avoid a slew of "+1" posts:

1. Does anyone *object* to allowing former chairs to stay subscribed
when they're no longer chairs?  If so, why?

2. Does anyone *object* to allowing anyone to subscribe, whether or
not they've ever been chairs?  If so, why?

(We'll assume that chairs will continue to be subscribed when they're
appointed (though they can always choose to unsubscribe afterward).)

Barry

---

From: Lee Howard <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 13:54:28 -0400

From:  WGChairs <[email-masked]> on behalf of Spencer Dawkins at
IETF <[email-masked]>
Date:  Thursday, July 23, 2015 at 7:22 AM
To:  Lou Berger <[email-masked]>
Cc:  WG Chairs <[email-masked]>, Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Subject:  Re: Open wgchairs mailing list?

> When I became a WG chair in the late 1990s, you had to already be a WG chair
> to be invited to WG chair training.
> 

WG Chair training is open to anyone? I didn¹t know that.
Is it publicly announced?
> So, adding prospective chairs to this list would be a discussion I'd encourage
> you folks to have ...

The set of ³potential chairs² is indistinguishable from ³IETF participants.²
We can make it open-subscription, but unless we announce somewhere
periodically that it¹s open, very very few proto-chairs will think to
subscribe.

I can¹t think of anything discussed on this listed that shouldn¹t be aired
publicly. Will contributions to the mailing list from people who have never
been chairs improve our work quality?
Maybe open archives is sufficient for transparency and training.
https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/wgchairs/current/maillist.html

Lee

>>> >> bbiw.net <http://bbiw.net>
>>> >> wgch
>>> >>
>>> >>
>> >
>> >

---

From: Tom Taylor <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 08:30:40 -0400

As a quasi-legitimate lurker on the list I'm all in favour. Technically 
I'm secretary of one of the WGs I used to co-chair, but I haven't really 
been doing anything for that group. I do find WG-Chairs useful.

Tom Taylor

---

From: Lou Berger <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 14:32:54 +0200

Barry,

What's the purpose / scope of discussion of the list if anyone can subscribe?

Lou

Ps my concern is that this list becomes yet another ietf-discuss list

---

From: "Andrew G. Malis" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 14:33:51 +0200

Barry,

No objection to either. For number 2, at the very least we should be
including WG secretaries.

Cheers,
Andy

---

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 14:34:59 +0200

Lee,

On Jul 23, 2015 2:01 PM, "Lee Howard" <[email-masked]> wrote:
>
>
>
> From: WGChairs <[email-masked]> on behalf of Spencer Dawkins
at IETF <[email-masked]>
>>
>> Sometime after the EDU team was created (I think), we opened up most of
the training for WG chairs to anyone.
>
> WG Chair training is open to anyone? I didn’t know that.

Because I've spent several years sequestered on Sunday afternoons, I'm kind
of vague on CURRENT EDU team offerings, but I believe the only closed
training is the Wednesday noon chairs lunch.

Paul Hoffman and I were doing open Sunday afternoon classes on Intro for WG
Chairs and for document editors, and then combined them into a single
tutorial on "WG Leadership" that we offered several times.

What happens after EDUNEXT is, of course, up to the EDU team, which serves
at the pleasure of the GEN AD, the last time I looked.

Spencer

>
>
> The set of “potential chairs” is indistinguishable from “IETF
participants.”
> We can make it open-subscription, but unless we announce somewhere
periodically that it’s open, very very few proto-chairs will think to
subscribe.
>
> I can’t think of anything discussed on this listed that shouldn’t be
aired publicly. Will contributions to the mailing list from people who have
never been chairs improve our work quality?

---

From: Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 08:49:49 -0400

On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF
<[email-masked]> wrote:
>>> > nebulous a group to me, so would stick with just not removing folks from the
>>> > list once added...
>>> >
>>> > Lou
>>>

I agree. Since the IETF pays for lunch for the attendees, I believe it
is restricted to WG Chair and Secretaries and presumably IESG/IAB
members and the like.

Thanks,
Donald
=============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA
 [email-masked]

>> I can’t think of anything discussed on this listed that shouldn’t be aired

---

From: "John G. Scudder" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 14:51:09 +0200

I would like to associate myself with Lou's question and his concern. Add to that the observation that the archives are open anyway.

I'm not going to get upset if the list becomes open-subscription, I just don't see the point.

--John

> On Jul 23, 2015, at 2:32 PM, Lou Berger <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Barry,
>

---

From: Benoit Claise <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 14:52:04 +0200

> Ps my concern is that this list becomes yet another ietf-discuss list
... at which point, I will automatically classify the wgchair emails to 
a folder (exactly like ietf-discuss) and read it at my leisure time

Regards, Benoit (note: during my leisure time, I don't read emails)

---

From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 15:04:06 +0200

Lee Howard wrote:
> very very few proto-chairs will think to subscribe.

They don't have to -- when we are starting to groom an unsuspecting
bright young IETFer to be a WG chair, we can just invite them to subscribe.

Grüße, Carsten

---

From: "Klaas Wierenga (kwiereng)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 13:36:30 +0000

> ... at which point, I will automatically classify the wgchair emails to a folder (exactly like ietf-discuss) and read it at my leisure time
> 

and how many people will show up at the wg-chair beer evening…. ;-)

Klaas

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 15:44:32 +0200

> bright young IETFer to be a WG chair, we can just invite them to subscribe.

Yes.  As I watched concerns being expressed on this thread, landed on
this same thought for subscribing prospective chairs.

> Ps my concern is that this list becomes yet another ietf-discuss list

Every IETF list has the challenge of staying within its scope. The scope
is defined by the list, not by the membership.  While it's certainly
true that larger membership can make staying within scope more
challenging (sometimes), I suspect that this particular list is
well-endowed with participants who will be assertive when someone strays...

d/

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 15:46:52 +0200

>> training is the Wednesday noon chairs lunch.

Meant to comment on this, too.

I've also asked the EDU folk to open announcement and admission about
the Wednesday training.  (I don't care how they handle the food part of
this.  It's open access to the information that concerns me.  The
material is often quite interesting and of on-going benefit, not just
for a meeting or two.)

d/

---

From: Mirjam Kuehne <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 16:07:55 +0200

Hi Dave,

> material is often quite interesting and of on-going benefit, not just

I know, this is not exactly what you were asking for, but many of the
slides (if available) and meeting notes are published here:

https://www.ietf.org/edu/wg-and-bof-chair-presentations.html

and also on the Edu Team wiki:

http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/group/edu/wiki/IETF93

We also asked Meetecho to record the WG chairs sessions from now on.

Regards,
Mirjam

---

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 16:11:26 +0200

Hi, Dave,

> material is often quite interesting and of on-going benefit, not just

 Agreed on often interesting and useful for longer than the next four
months.

If I wasn't in the room (because of room, or food, or whatever), I'd be
happy to watch on Meetecho. The quality of experience for the tech plenary
was great for me.

Spencer

---

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 16:12:22 +0200

Mirjam,

> We also asked Meetecho to record the WG chairs sessions from now on.

Thanks!

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 16:19:48 +0200

On 7/23/2015 4:07 PM, Mirjam Kuehne wrote:
> I know, this is not exactly what you were asking for, but 
...

Mirjam,

While not, not exactly what I'm suggesting, this is definitely goodness
to be doing, independent of my suggestion.

And then, of course, collecting links to all these on a page for Chairs
and Prospective Chairs...

d/

---

From: Eliot Lear <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 17:33:50 +0200

Hi Barry,

I had thought that the purpose of this list was to impart critical
information to chairs regarding various deadlines and requirements of
chairing (scheduling slots, etc); and for chairs to discuss logistical
management issues, and perhaps maybe even some overlap.

In as much as others want to listen in, that's fine.  But chairs have a
responsibility to attend to the issues above, and in as much as others
may clutter up the list with stuff that is best dealt with elsewhere, I
would oppose changes.  Postings, in particular, would not be welcome. 
On the other hand, no substantive discussion about standards should
occur on this list.  That has to be done where others CAN participate.

Eliot

---

From: "Acee Lindem (acee)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 16:29:30 +0000

Agreed - and can you imagine how long this already protracted thread would
be if the list were open?

Acee

---

From: Olafur Gudmundsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 12:43:22 -0400

> On Jul 23, 2015, at 3:36 AM, Dave Crocker <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> G'day.
> 

So Dave,
 you want to take away the motivation of working hard towards closing down a working group, in order to escape from this list :-) 

During the interval between chairing WG’s I did not miss this list. 

Olafur

---

From: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 19:01:40 +0200

> What's the purpose / scope of discussion of the list if anyone can

My view -- and I'm definitely NOT speaking as an AD, but as a former
chair -- is that the scope doesn't change: it's still for
communication to and discussion among the chairs.

Anyone can follow the archive now, through the web interface.  And
when IMAP access is opened up, anyone can get an effective read-only
subscription by accessing the IMAP version.  And anyone can post, with
moderation if they're not subscribed or white-listed.  So the only
real difference that we get from allowing open subscription is that we
allow people to subscribe and then post.  Perhaps that's not
necessary.

> Ps my concern is that this list becomes yet another ietf-discuss list

Dave answered this exactly as I would.  If the discussion goes off
track, we address that.  We can always use our existing procedures to
give 30-day suspensions, and, in extreme cases, to call for PR
Actions.

Realistically, I don't expect to see a huge number of non-chairs
joining the list, and I don't expect that we'll have real problems in
this regard.

Barry

---

From: Derek Atkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 20:29:49 -0400

My $0.02 is that we should not unsubscribe ex-chairs from this list.  As
for non-chairs, I feel that the ADs can choose to add appropriate people
(e.g. secretaries or possible future chairs) as they see fit.  I'm not
afraid that this list will become another ietf-discuss list; I don't
think that will happen.

-derek

-- 
       Derek Atkins                 617-623-3745
       [email-masked]             www.ihtfp.com
       Computer and Internet Security Consultant

---

From: Toerless Eckert <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 21:09:28 -0700

> allow people to subscribe and then post.  Perhaps that's not

My "felt" experience with posting to various IETF mailing lists over
the decades for mostly one-off questions to adjacent groups that i was not
subscribed to was that WG chairs never released the posts held
for moderation, and i figured that it is an unreasonable expectation
to make life for randomn posters easier and wasting WG chair time
by having them also serve as moderators, so i then started to subscribe
before doing postings even for one off Q&A threads.

Then i became a WG chair, and immediately i get ding'ed when i did not
relase some moderation hold postings ;-). So i just put in the global
whitelist for my group which i think works great.

Aka: IMHO moderation does not work well for useful RTT unless you have some
moderator that run his mailing list as a social neworking hobby with
eg: email on his/her mobile phone to do the moderation job. Who's
moderating wg-chairs ? I can't imagine those persons to have that free time.

I'd suggest to make the wg-chairs mailing list open for a while (eg:
2 IETF meetings) and then re-evaluate.

Toerless

-- 
---
Toerless Eckert, [email-masked]

---

From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 05:55:40 +0200

> management issues, and perhaps maybe even some overlap.

So, yes, it is certainly used for time-sensitive and administrative
information such as deadlines and event announcements.

However it is used for more than that.

Among the other threads that have appears in the times I've been
subscribed to the list, in recent years::

     Document shepherd role

     IESG experimental shepherd writeup

     New "Note Well" summary slide from the IESG

     Online Protocol Testing Experience

     Posting with psudonyms...

     An acceptable use for Internet-Drafts?​

     Drafts on how to call and pronounce Chinese names

     moving (some) reviews earlier​

And just this year:

     FCFS policy unclear for "vanity" code points

     Standardizing the zeroth and last code point of a registry

     suggestion: list interim meetings in "agendas" and "minutes"
     pages on WG tools page

     RFC 6982: Improving Awareness of Running Code: The Implementation
     Status Section​

     Storing Large WG-related Artifacts

These are wg 'issues' rather than 'immediate administration'.

We used to have only the formal position of wgchair.  We've expanded
that.  There are other folk who participate in the operational aspects
of a working group.

More generally, we have a body of folk in the IETF who wander through
various working group positions over time or who we want to recruit to
such positions.  It will help the IETF e to keep such folk up to date
with working group operational issues and possibly should be allowed to
participate in discussion of some of them.

Keeping the corp of wg assistants informed of operational "issues" is a
pure win.  I see no downsides.

I said "possibly should be allowed" because I do take the point about
the concern for noise and other problematic participation.  My own
inclination is to suggest starting with a relatively permissive
membership and participation model and then fixing it if there is a
pattern of problems.  (For example, it would not be that difficult to
revert non-chairs or non-position holders to have no posting rights or
to make them be moderated.)

d/

d/

---

From: Robert Sparks <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 10:42:41 +0200

I agree with Dave, and think "relatively permissive" should be "anyone 
can subscribe".

I don't think we'll break this list by letting anyone subscribe - we're 
all supposed to be good at helping guide conversations to better places 
if they're not where they should be.

I'll also add that I've used this list to send heads up about new 
chair-specific tool features/quirks to the list below.

RjS

---

From: Adam Roach <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 11:23:01 +0200

Yep, I'm inclined to agree with Robert and Dave here.

/a

On 7/24/15 10:42, Robert Sparks wrote:
> I don't think we'll break this list by letting anyone subscribe - 
> we're all supposed to be good at helping guide conversations to better 
> places if they're not where they should be.
>