Markdown Version | Session Recording

Session Date/Time: 08 Nov 2023 08:30

genarea

Summary

The genarea meeting covered three main topics: revision of IETF venue requirements, antitrust documents, and community control of ISG discuss guidelines. Discussions involved community feedback, proposed solutions, and potential next steps for each topic.

Key Discussion Points

• IETF Venue Requirements Revision:

  • Clarification needed on "close proximity" for venue selection (e.g., defining maximum walking distance).
  • Requirement for room block size should be more flexible than the current "one-third of attendees" rule. "Sufficient rooms to meet expected demand" proposed.
  • Overflow hotels should be an optional feature.
  • Ad-hoc space should be easily accessible for informal discussions, rather than strictly defined as a "lounge."
  • Unfiltered Internet access: How to handle countries with filtering policies (e.g., New Zealand's child sexual abuse imagery filtering). The goal is transparency regarding such policies when choosing meeting locations.

• Antitrust Documents:

  • Concerns that guidance on "topics to avoid" or "topics requiring caution" could be weaponized to stifle legitimate discussion.
  • Distinction between public and unpublished market data: Discussions about public market data are appropriate, but private market data present antitrust risks.
  • The legal and competitive context of guidelines and policies was emphasized. The application is dependent on jurisdictional and situational nuance.
  • Definition of group negotiations of IPR terms needs to clarify applicability within the IETF context (e.g. design teams).
  • The role of the IETF in preventing threats or abusive conduct was discussed, and a need to ensure the standard process is kept transparent.

• Community Control of ISG Discuss Guidelines:

  • Discuss criteria are treated as authoritative but lack community consensus.
  • The ISG balloting procedures and discuss criteria are internal processes not necessarily controlled by the community.
  • Debate over whether current Discuss criteria adhere to RFC 2026, and if they can be formally appealed if not.
  • Multiple options were discussed: status quo, documentation of internal ISG procedures, or moving control of the process to the community.
  • A significant problem was identified: The community misunderstands the appeal process, sees Discuss/Abstain positions as permanent blocks even when intended otherwise, and isn't sufficiently aware of the underlying balloting criteria.
  • The interplay between ADs, workgroup chairs, and process was identified as contributing to confusion, with the need to ensure greater understanding about roles and shared community values.

Decisions and Action Items

• IETF Venue Requirements Revision:

  • Update the document to include a specific maximum walking distance/kilometer for "close proximity."
  • New text will be provided that specifically addresses the need for IETF consensus for expiring meetings.
  • Continue discussion on the meeting venue mailing list.

• Antitrust Documents:

  • Revise the document to replace "detailed market data" with "unpublished market data."
  • Clarify that the document doesn't prevent discussion of implementation complexity.
  • Include the clarification on "private or potentially discriminatory group negotiations of IPR terms," making the context is internal to the IETF.
  • Discuss concerns over whether a new interpretation of 'private' that relates only to internal IETF groups is suitable.
  • Continue the discussion on the antitrust policy mailing list. If agreement is not reached, a virtual interim genarea session will be considered.

• Community Control of ISG Discuss Guidelines:

  • The ISG will continue planning, documenting, and demystifying their balloting procedures.
  • Continue discussion on the gendipsatch mailing list.
  • Actionable proposals for modifying or clarifying discuss criteria or appeal processes are encouraged.

Next Steps

• Revised drafts of the IETF Venue Requirements and Antitrust Documents will be published and discussed on their respective mailing lists.
• Mark Cunningham will refine and propose further steps on ISG discuss guideline community control, and solicit feedback on the gendipsatch mailing list.