Subject: Re: call for technical tutorials

From: Paul Wouters <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2021 22:54:34 -0400 (EDT)

On Fri, 29 Oct 2021, Michael Richardson wrote:

> Alvaro Retana <[email-masked]> wrote:
>    >> 7) how to respond to IESG DISCUSS emails
>
>    > Warren recently wrote this blog post:
>    > https://www.ietf.org/blog/handling-iesg-ballot-positions/
>
> His advice is not wrong (it's very right), but it's not terribly helpful from
> an authoring *process* point of view.

Sure, but I don't think Warren was discussing that part.

> I also think that it significantly lacks advice to WG chairs on what to do.

I agree that it is a little unclear in most situations. For example, if
a DISCUSS leads to a change from SHOULD to MUST, should it go back to
the WG as well? Is that something the RFC Editor can change (eg as part
of AUTH48). Although usually, a new versions is published, so the WG is
notified either implicitly or explicitly, and does have a change to say
something about the change.

I just really wishes we could see DISCUSS items sooner in the process.
They are often of very good quality but inconveniently late in the
process. Or re-phrased, the WGLC and IETF LC could (should?) have a
higher quality.

Paul

---

From: Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2021 12:50:51 -0400

Paul Wouters <[email-masked]> wrote:
    >> Alvaro Retana <[email-masked]> wrote: >> 7) how to respond to
    >> IESG DISCUSS emails
    >>
    >> > Warren recently wrote this blog post: >
    >> His advice is not wrong (it's very right), but it's not terribly
    >> helpful from an authoring *process* point of view.

    > something about the change.

I think that there are bigger issues: what are the roles of the WG chairs
during IESG review?   My take is that the WG chairs should be intimate aware
of what's going on, should read and track the points, and where there are
comments that relate to things the WG has already debated, the chair should
respond.
In a sense, the WG Chairs should be sophisticated "fanboys"^Wcheerleaders for the document.
In a good sense, not the derisive way that the term has evolved into.

    > process. Or re-phrased, the WGLC and IETF LC could (should?) have a

Yes, I strongly agree here.
The IESG needs to do less, because there is less to do.
I don't feel that the sector reviews are really at all integrated into the
ADs view.  "How will you increase the effectiveness of the sector reviews"
was a question that the four recent nomcoms I've been involved with.  The
answers were always very nice, but often not a lot of real follow through.

--
Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-

---

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2021 16:44:00 -0500

This is an excellent discussion, and I hope it continues (where do WG
chairs have beer nights now?), but it's probably worth changing the subject
if people follow up.

Best,

Spencer

---

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2021 17:21:39 -0500

Sorry, I meant to follow up on this sooner, but ... well, here we are. But
to Adrian's point ...

On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 9:02 AM Adrian Farrel <[email-masked]> wrote:

> I think that what Karen is talking about is "technical related to IETF
> topics". For example, we had one on "how modern routers are built" and
> another on "traffic engineering".
>

If we're talking about what I think we're talking about, I think Adrian may
be referring to sessions like "Spherical Routers, Forwarding Plane
Realities, and Implications for Protocol Designers" at IETF 104 - video at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqTC9uLvoR4, complete materials at
https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/wgtlgo/meetings/. These were under the
name "Technology Deep Dives".

We've had a few of these, but they aren't easy to find in the proceedings.

> Thus "everything you need to know about my WG's pet topic in one hour"
>

We had a lot of conversations about these programs on the IESG when I was
still serving. Here's how I thought they were different:

   - They weren't limited to an hour - "Spherical Routers" was just under
   two hours - and they weren't scheduled against other sessions
   - They weren't limited to one working group, or even to one area.
   "Spherical Routers" was at the intersection of RTG, INT, TSV, and OPS
   - They were focused on cross-area problems - "Spherical Routers" was
   focused on why decisions that protocol designers made were difficult to
   implement on modern routers, and there was a three-part series of sessions
   on various aspects of misusing DNS (at least ART and OPS)
   - They weren't intended to serve as tutorials, although it was possible
   to learn things from attending
   - At least "Spherical Routers" was intended to include "next steps" -
   brainstorming about what could improve things

If anyone is interested in archeology, I think Warren is the AD who has
been most consistently involved with these.

Best,

Spencer

---

From: Erik Kline <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2021 16:53:51 -0800

>
> If we're talking about what I think we're talking about, I think Adrian
> may be referring to sessions like "Spherical Routers, Forwarding Plane

I was just going over the IETF youtube playlist page
<https://www.youtube.com/user/ietf/playlists>, and it might be nice if we
had a TDD playlist with all the associated videos (similar to the Tutorials
playlist
<https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLC86T-6ZTP5h-3SH1WlefnV9qdbWfQJ3I>).

---

From: Toerless Eckert <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2021 02:38:02 +0100

Creating beter playlists or any othrer form of directories would be lovely, yes.

That particular session, i was one of the speakers. I think it was prtty
ok. for internal IETF community education, but i guess/think that we might
get the most out not such "inside-baseball" sessions, but sessions that
relate our work product (RFC functionality for a particular technology)
to the reality of operators, developers and users.

Cheers
    Toerless

---

From: Jane Coffin <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2021 14:36:58 +0000

I like that idea, Erik.

Best to all,
Jane

From: irsg <[email-masked]> on behalf of Erik Kline <[email-masked]>
Date: Monday, November 8, 2021 at 7:54 PM
To: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Cc: Michael Richardson <[email-masked]>, Adrian Farrel <[email-masked]>, WG Chairs <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [irsg] Technical, but not quite tutorials (was: Re: call for technical tutorials)

If we're talking about what I think we're talking about, I think Adrian may be referring to sessions like "Spherical Routers, Forwarding Plane Realities, and Implications for Protocol Designers" at IETF 104 - video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqTC9uLvoR4<https://us-west-2.protection.sophos.com?d=youtube.com&u=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cueW91dHViZS5jb20vd2F0Y2g_dj1DcVRDOXVMdm9SNA==&i=NjExZDIyY2Q4NzUzZDIwZjVkYWQ4NGJm&t=N1Z5eG9XYkdUcGdWN200UWJjWG5YQ2NQbUladUQzMUI0N3FIUHY0U3Zrcz0=&h=f067502455174e598a523ede71f53302>, complete materials at https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/wgtlgo/meetings/<https://us-west-2.protection.sophos.com?d=ietf.org&u=aHR0cHM6Ly9kYXRhdHJhY2tlci5pZXRmLm9yZy9ncm91cC93Z3RsZ28vbWVldGluZ3Mv&i=NjExZDIyY2Q4NzUzZDIwZjVkYWQ4NGJm&t=cjNIRjhWQzRsWXlSRXVSQXZUTGVsNUFsMXVNelZsdk83a3plT3NCZzlnbz0=&h=f067502455174e598a523ede71f53302>. These were under the name "Technology Deep Dives".

I was just going over the IETF youtube playlist page<https://us-west-2.protection.sophos.com?d=youtube.com&u=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cueW91dHViZS5jb20vdXNlci9pZXRmL3BsYXlsaXN0cw==&i=NjExZDIyY2Q4NzUzZDIwZjVkYWQ4NGJm&t=K1EwUGZYQUpxQ2Ixd0hWWUlnM3lGNkczTU5CeGsxTnA2T2U0ZW5ZcExhTT0=&h=f067502455174e598a523ede71f53302>, and it might be nice if we had a TDD playlist with all the associated videos (similar to the Tutorials playlist<https://us-west-2.protection.sophos.com?d=youtube.com&u=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cueW91dHViZS5jb20vcGxheWxpc3Q_bGlzdD1QTEM4NlQtNlpUUDVoLTNTSDFXbGVmblY5cWRiV2ZRSjNJ&i=NjExZDIyY2Q4NzUzZDIwZjVkYWQ4NGJm&t=WVE4K2tXdnpYaVBjOFlSOUtPSXZUektzMHVsOFFPaDJkV2loQkFXdGdJYz0=&h=f067502455174e598a523ede71f53302>).

---

From: Greg Wood <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2021 16:04:40 -0500

Hi,

> On 8, Nov2021, at 19:53, Erik Kline <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> If we're talking about what I think we're talking about, I think Adrian may be referring to sessions like "Spherical Routers, Forwarding Plane Realities, and Implications for Protocol Designers" at IETF 104 - video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqTC9uLvoR4, complete materials at https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/wgtlgo/meetings/. These were under the name "Technology Deep Dives". 
> 
> I was just going over the IETF youtube playlist page, and it might be nice if we had a TDD playlist with all the associated videos (similar to the Tutorials playlist).

Just replying here to close the loop and note that this now exists: 

https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PLC86T-6ZTP5jLEgu8to8qjzL0uxOkjNSE

Thanks for the nudges and especially from Erik to get it done--and of course to all the folks who have helped put together and present the technology deep dives so far. They are consistently among the most watched videos on the IETF YouTube channel. (Total number of views on YouTube should be visible for the individual videos.)

As Karen O’Donoghue mentioned to kick off this thread, suggestions about--or even volunteers for!--future Technology Deep Dive-like talks with the immediate goal of getting experience with a few of them will be gratefully accepted.

-Greg

---

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2021 10:16:37 -0600

Greg,

On Thu, Nov 18, 2021 at 3:05 PM Greg Wood <[email-masked]> wrote:

> > I was just going over the IETF youtube playlist page, and it might be
> nice if we had a TDD playlist with all the associated videos (similar to
> the Tutorials playlist).
>
>

Thank you for producing this.

> Thanks for the nudges and especially from Erik to get it done--and of
> course to all the folks who have helped put together and present the
> technology deep dives so far. They are consistently among the most watched
> videos on the IETF YouTube channel. (Total number of views on YouTube
> should be visible for the individual videos.)
>

I had no idea - and I've helped with all of these except for the second
one. That's great to know.

> As Karen O’Donoghue mentioned to kick off this thread, suggestions
> about--or even volunteers for!--future Technology Deep Dive-like talks with
> the immediate goal of getting experience with a few of them will be
> gratefully accepted.
>

I would love for this series (under a variety of names, in the past) to
continue.

Karen, where would discussion about this series continue?

Best,

Spencer

---

From: "Salz, Rich" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2021 16:20:43 +0000

*   I would love for this series (under a variety of names, in the past) to continue.

  *   Karen, where would discussion about this series continue?

I’m not Karen, but I sometimes play her on TV :)  EMODIR seems appropriate, https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/emodir/about/