Subject: [Rfcplusplus] Issues with RFCPlusPlus

From: "Leslie Daigle" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2018 17:03:26 -0400

As someone who has her name on a number of RFCs, not the least of which 
is RFC4844 (“The RFC Series and RFC Editor”), I wanted to share a 
few observations.  Sadly, I am not expecting to be able to make it to 
the BoF itself, as oddly-scheduled as it is, I have competing 
commitments.

Here are the things that I think are important to consider in discussing 
this topic, as presented:

1/ The numbers given illustrate that there is no real problem. 92% of 
the RFCs published are from the IETF, so at a maximum, 8% of the RFCs 
published are gaming for brand (the notional problem to be solved).

2/ If there is a real “branding” problem, then the legacy situation 
must be addressed as well.  Solution:  change the names of everything.  
No more RFCs, just some other name for IETF-flavoured documents, and a 
different other name for non-IETF documents.  If you can’t discuss 
this proposal seriously, then the real problem you are trying to address 
is IETF-domination, not label-branding conflation.

And, the RFC Series is not the IETF’s:  it is independent.

3/ The IAB is the shepherd of the RFC Series — explicitly so that 
non-IETF streams have a champion that isn’t the IESG.   Martin 
Thomson’s document does not reflect that posture.  There’s an 
opportunity for the IAB to review its responsibilities here.

4/ On a scale of “There are a few clouds on the horizon, perhaps I 
should pack an umbrella”, to “the entire IETF organization is in 
danger of imploding because years of navel-gazing, cliquish control of 
access to resources and alienating operators and new industry 
players”, it seems to me that this issue (if it’s even a problem) 
fits rather more to the start of the spectrum.

It would honestly be helpful if the IAB would expend its creative 
efforts on addressing the scope and focus, and, ah, architecture 
questions facing our work:  we have actual issues that are closer to the 
rougher end of the spectrum.

5/ Why is the ISOC Board Chair co-chairing this BoF?  (Hint:  there 
might be a reasonable answer, but many answers are in fact not in the 
least bit reasonable).

Leslie.

-- 

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Leslie Daigle
Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises
[email-masked]
-------------------------------------------------------------------