Subject: [webfinger] Discussing DISCUSSing

From: Pete Resnick <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 09:39:07 -0500

Folks,

Right now, draft-ietf-appsawg-webfinger is in the "IESG Evaluation" 
stage of review.

For folks who don't know the details of what that means: The document is 
to be evaluated on the IESG telechat this Thursday and the Area 
Directors are now filling out their "ballots" on the document. The 
choices are "YES" (i.e., I think this is a good idea), "NO OBJECTION" 
(i.e., I think this is fine to go forward so long as someone else is 
supporting it), "ABSTAIN" (i.e., I don't think this is a good idea and I 
don't think this should go forward unless I am overruled by the rest of 
-- really, 2/3 of -- the IESG), and "DISCUSS" (i.e., I don't think this 
should go forward until we have some more discussion -- and perhaps 
changes -- on particular points). You can see the ballots for the 
webfinger document at 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-appsawg-webfinger/ballot/ if 
you wish to follow along. DISCUSSes are the ones that take time, because 
of course they require discussion. However, normally those DISCUSSions 
take place only between the AD who has the issue and the author(s), the 
document shepherd, the chairs, and the rest of the IESG and are only 
brought back to the WG if the outcome would differ significantly from WG 
consensus.

I have some serious points I wish to DISCUSS about webfinger, but after 
speaking with Barry, I agree that it's appropriate to have those 
discussions with the WG included directly. So I will be Cc'ing my ballot 
to this list. That said, I do want to ask for your patience and 
restraint: This is also being Cc'ed to all of the IESG. The IESG list 
has a *huge* volume of messages. You're also likely to see comments from 
ADs who have not been on this list from the get-go (myself included) 
that might seem downright ignorant. Wait for a bit. Let the chairs or 
the authors respond before you jump in and call me the idiot that I am. 
:-) Or use private email. If you see a point that you think you can 
clarify for everyone, please do respond publicly. I just want to avoid 
an email storm that is likely to make nobody happy.

If, after DISCUSSing these points, I am still not satisfied, I can 
always move to ABSTAIN and let the rest of the IESG make the decision. 
But the point of the DISCUSS is to discuss, to see if we can't come to 
some sort of agreement on what needs to be in the document. To quote a 
famous US film: "Remain calm!" ;-)

pr

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478