Session Date/Time: 27 Jul 2022 17:30

gendispatch

Summary

The gendispatch session at IETF 114 covered two main topics: updating "The Tao of the IETF" (DAO) and establishing a process for revising NomCom eligibility criteria. The discussion on the DAO revealed differing views on its purpose (historical artifact vs. newcomer guide) and the best update mechanism, with no clear consensus reached. For NomCom eligibility, there was strong support for forming a short-lived, buff-less working group to address changes related to hybrid and remote participation, with specific chartering details to be refined on a mailing list.

Key Discussion Points

Updating The Tao of the IETF (DAO):
- Current State & Problems: Lars Eggert presented on the current DAO, which transitioned from an RFC to a webpage described by RFC 6722 in 2006. The intent was more rapid updates, but this hasn't materialized (5 revisions in a decade). Issues include ISG approval without Data Tracker integration, old DAO RFCs being cited (causing confusion with current web content), and RFC 6722's prescriptive nature (e.g., specific HTTP URLs) restricting web operations.
- Role of the DAO: A central point of discussion was the DAO's target audience. Many participants, especially long-time attendees, felt the current DAO is not suitable for newcomers due to its length, historical arcana, and tone, suggesting it should primarily serve as a historical/cultural artifact. Conversely, some newcomers and guides noted they found it useful, albeit too long.
- Process Options:
  - RFC vs. Webpage: Lars proposed either reverting to RFC publication (to leverage Data Tracker for ISG review) or having ISG approval removed for web-only updates.
  - Hybrid Approaches: Suggestions included periodic RFC snapshots alongside more frequent web updates, or an "immutable RFC" pointing to a dynamic webpage.
  - Newcomer Material: A strong sentiment emerged to decouple newcomer guidance from the DAO, creating separate, layered, modern artifacts (webpages, videos, tutorials) tailored for quick onboarding, potentially managed by the Emodir Working Group.
  - Editorial Process: Lars mentioned an existing editor team using GitHub, though not fully congruent with RFC 6722.
- Legal Context: It was noted that past DAO versions have been cited in lawsuits, emphasizing that even "informal" process documents can carry legal weight.
- No Clear Consensus: The discussion did not yield a single, broadly supported path forward for the DAO's format, review, or target audience.
NomCom Eligibility Criteria:
- Context: Martin Duke had drafted changes to NomCom eligibility, specifically for remote and hybrid participants, following the experimental RFC 8989.
- Proposed Solution: Lars Eggert proposed a quick, spin-up/spin-down, buff-less working group to address these changes. Barry Leiba drafted a charter for this purpose.
- Scope Clarification: Participants highlighted that NomCom eligibility criteria are also used for recall committees and recall signature eligibility. The charter needs to be adjusted to explicitly cover these.
- Document Update Strategy: Debate arose whether to simply update a specific section (e.g., 8989 updating a point in 8713) or to fully rewrite BCP 10 (RFC 8713) to consolidate all NomCom-related information, even if only the eligibility section is being actively changed. The preference was for a tightly scoped update, rather than opening up the entire BCP 10.
- Logistics: The need for rapid action was stressed due to upcoming NomCom cycles and associated Data Tracker changes. Lars is seeking chairs for this short-lived working group. Martin Duke confirmed he would author the product, using RFC 8989 as a baseline.
- Support: Strong support was expressed for forming this working group, with an uncharacteristic level of agreement from the room and remote participants.

Decisions and Action Items

DAO (The Tao of the IETF):
- Decision: No specific decision was made on the future of the DAO's format or review process due to diverse opinions.
- Action Item: Chairs (Pete Resnick and Kirsty Payne) will summarize the discussion, review comments, and formulate a few general suggestions for the group.
- Action Item: Lars Eggert will engage the current DAO editors to understand their preferred process for future updates.
NomCom Eligibility Criteria:
- Decision: A new, short-lived, buff-less working group will be chartered to update NomCom eligibility criteria, primarily focusing on hybrid and remote participants.
- Action Item: Barry Leiba will adjust the proposed charter text to explicitly cover recall committee and recall signature eligibility, and to clarify the relationship with existing BCPs (RFC 8713, RFC 8989) while maintaining a tight scope.
- Action Item: Lars Eggert will sponsor this working group and is seeking chairs with sufficient cycles to complete the work rapidly (within six months).
- Action Item: Martin Duke will author the working group's output, using RFC 8989 as a baseline.

Next Steps

DAO: Chairs will circulate a summary of the discussion and potential paths forward to the mailing list for further refinement. Lars will consult with DAO editors.
NomCom Eligibility: Discussion regarding the precise charter wording and document update strategy will continue on the eligibility-discuss mailing list. Lars will proceed with establishing the working group and identifying chairs.