PUFI BOF (Procedures Update for IETF)

1. PUFI BOF(Procedures Update for IETF) Chair: Pete Resnick Franklin 1/2 Audio channel 1

2. Agenda • Documents • draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes • draft-ietf-newtrk-docid • draft-klensin-stds-review-panel • draft-otis-newtrk-rfc-set • draft-bradner-ietf-stds-trk • draft-bradner-ietf-proc-ideas • draft-alvestrand-icar-xarea • draft-dawkins-newtrk-wgs • draft-klensin-nomcom-term • draft-ietf-newtrk-promotion • draft-iesg-alvestrand-twolevel • draft-dawkins-pstmt-twostage • draft-klensin-recall-rev • draft-ietf-newtrk-repurposing-isd • draft-klensin-overload • draft-huston-ietf-pact

3. Agenda • Document handling changes • Other changes • IESG/WG procedural changes • Nomcom/recall changes Ordered by simplicity of change as determined by Pete Brian’s doc appears first because some of the changes are simple

4. Ground rules • Try to gauge consensus on two metrics • “Pain” incurred by making the change • “Motivation” to change the current state These are independent variables • IESG/IAB are equal participants in this discussion. However… • Russ may call consensus. However… • If there is consensus that Russ/IESG doesn’t get to call consensus…

5. Document Handling (1) • Abolish "STD 1" RFCs [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes]. • Remove reference to RFC 1 [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Call out normative dependency rules. [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Specify seperating normative and informative references, and pointing out down-reference procedures [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes]

6. Document Handling (2) • Update the reference to the RFC formatting rules [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Add reference to RFC Editor errata [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Document the I-D archive. [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Don't expire drafts under any kind of IESG consideration. [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes]

7. Document Handling (3) • Call out that a Technical Specification might be an API, a data format, or a registry. [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Remove explicit separation of Techical Specification and Applicability Statement [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Apply "requirements levels" to all specs and BCPs [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Allow a document to contain it's own process variance statement [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes]

8. Document Handling (4) • Point out that Informational and Experimental RFCs are sometimes protocols and often get reviewed by the IESG [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Document separation between individual submissions and RFC Editor independent submissions, IAB, and IRTF documents. [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Remove idea of a requirements document as conformance specification. [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Clarify that more recent standards obsolete older ones regardless of their respective stages on the standards track [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes]

9. Document Handling (5) • Remove implementation warnings about PS documents [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • IESG assigns Historic status [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Remove IESG "stuck at level" document review requirement and make it the community's responsibility to request such review [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Require AD sponsorship of non-WG Informational or Experimental except for RFC Editor submissions [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes]

10. Document Handling (6) • Loosen the DS advancement rules to give discretion to IESG [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Fast-track some old but widely deployed documents to full standard [draft-ietf-newtrk-promotion] • Say that BCPs must be IETF reviewed and IESG approved [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Say that advancing through the standards track requires either a WG or an AD sponsorship [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes]

11. Document Handling (7) • Rename Proposed Standard as "Preliminary Standard" [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Rename Draft Standard as "Deployable Standard" [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Standards-track identifiers (instead of only for full standard) [draft-ietf-newtrk-docid, draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Drop Draft Standard level [draft-dawkins-pstmt-twostage]

12. Document Handling (8) • RFC Sets, i.e., updateable documents that point to a set of RFCs. [draft-otis-newtrk-rfc-set] • Add a "Working Group Snapshot" label to drafts to identify WG milestones [draft-dawkins-newtrk-wgs] • Create an Internet Standards Documentation series [draft-ietf-newtrk-repurposing-isd] • Switch standards track to "Stable Snapshot", "Proposed Standard", "Internet Standard" [draft-bradner-ietf-stds-trk]

13. Other changes • Remove things now in by RFC 4844 and 4846 [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Remove the reference to the ISOC newsletter [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Strike discussion of what the Internet is in 2026 [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Clarify interaction between IETF and other SDOs [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes]

14. IESG/WG Procedural Changes (1) • Allow spam to be deleted from WG archives [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Allow WGs to have the secretariat keep the e-mail archive [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Allow any decsion by IESG, chairs, or other appointed roles, to be appealable [draft-carpenter-rfc2026-changes] • Mandatory independent technical review before IESG review [draft-bradner-ietf-proc-ideas] • WG chairs and document editors participate in IESG deliberation [draft-bradner-ietf-proc-ideas] • AD designated reviewer which can substitute for AD review [draft-bradner-ietf-proc-ideas]

15. IESG/WG Procedural Changes (2) • Cross area review teams review documents before IESG (and have force of IESG decisions) [draft-alvestrand-icar-xarea] • Require 3 ADs to agree to return a document to WG [draft-bradner-ietf-proc-ideas] • Require 2/3 of ADs to re-return a document after WG review [draft-bradner-ietf-proc-ideas] • Assign IAB task of technical review of documents (instead of IESG) [draft-bradner-ietf-proc-ideas] • Separate Internet Standards Review Panel (ISRP) from the IESG [draft-klensin-stds-review-panel] • Increase the size of the IESG and divide/disperse tasks of document review and WG management [draft-iesg-alvestrand-twolevel]

16. IESG/WG Procedural Changes (3) • Restructure IETF into Ops, Sec, and Gen, with IAB review [draft-bradner-ietf-proc-ideas] • Limit number of WGs per area [draft-klensin-overload] • More explict analysis required of WG charters [draft-huston-ietf-pact] • Short timeouts are put in place for IESG document discussions [draft-huston-ietf-pact] • The IESG would do (modified) proportional voting on all documents [draft-huston-ietf-pact] • WG drafts have time limits for publication [draft-huston-ietf-pact]

17. Nomcom/Recall Changes • Two-phase nomcom; first decide on which incumbents return, then choose from new folks [draft-klensin-nomcom-term] • Allow IAB and IESG members to be recall petitioners [draft-klensin-recall-rev]