►
From YouTube: IETF105-ADMINPLENARY-20190724-1820
Description
ADMINPLENARY meeting session at IETF105
2019/07/24 1820
https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/105/proceedings/
A
So
welcome
everyone
to
the
administrative
and
operations
plenary.
My
name
is
ELISA
Cooper
and
I'm.
The
chair
of
the
IETF,
and
thank
you
for
sticking
around
for
this
portion
of
the
plenary.
So
I
didn't
get
to
go
outside
during
the
day
yesterday,
but
I
heard
that
it
that
it
rained
did
anybody
see
a
rainbow
yesterday?
A
A
Think,
as
people
who
were
reading
the
mailing
list
earlier
today
may
have
seen
based
on
requirements
from
the
hotel,
we
are
have
to
be
out
of
this
room
at
9:00
p.m.
so
we're
gonna
have
to
cut
ourselves
off
then,
unfortunately,
but
we'll
try
to
be
quick
in
this
early
part.
So
we
have
lots
of
time
at
the
end.
So
first
of
all,
I'd
like
to
extend
a
big
thank
you
to
our
meeting
hosts,
Comcast
and
NBCUniversal.
A
B
Either
Lundin
from
Comcast
NBC,
Universal
I
like
to
say
to
everybody,
came
out
last
night.
I
hope
you
had
a
great
time.
I
we
had
a
lot
of
fun
planning
it
and
Montreal
is
a
great
city
to
host
of
event
in.
So,
if
you
ever,
we
ever
come
back
here.
You
want
to
be
a
global
host
jump
in
it's
fun.
I
can
tell
you
from
experience,
so
it
was
a
lot
of
fun,
organizing
105
and
and
end
it
stuff.
So
so
much
so,
we've
decided
we're.
Gonna
do
buddy
cane.
A
A
Alright,
so
moving
on
to
my
report,
three
topics
today,
the
first
will
spend
a
moment
on
participant
statistics
for
this
meeting
talk
a
little
bit
about
our
ongoing
experiment
with
open
time
in
the
meeting
agenda.
I'll
talk
a
little
bit
about
conduct
in
the
IETF,
so
here
you
can
see
our
usual
statistics
for
participation
at
1079
people
on
site.
At
this
meeting
eerily
similar
to
the
number
of
people
we
had
on
site
in
Montreal
last
summer
we
had
1,000
78
people
on
site,
so
quite
consistent,
not
sure
that
was
a
goal,
but
we
achieved
it.
A
We
started
off
the
week
with
the
IETF
hackathon
on
Saturday
and
Sunday
280
on-site
attendees.
So
this
is
our
second
largest
hackathon
ever
not
as
not
as
big
as
the
one
in
Prague
last
time,
but
but
still
a
fantastic
turnout.
People
working
on
42
different
projects,
it's
become
essentially
a
staple
of
the
ITF
meeting
week
for
a
good
chunk
of
our
population.
A
We
had
to
hack
them
on
happy
hour
on
Monday
night,
where
people
got
to
advertise
their
projects
and
spend
a
little
bit
more
time
talking
in
depth
with
other
participants
about
what
they
had
accomplished
and
the
next
one
will
be
happening.
The
Saturday
and
Sunday
of
the
next
IETF
meeting,
November
16
and
17
in
Singapore.
A
So
the
open
time,
the
open
agenda,
time
experiment
people
may
realize
that
we're
we've
been
doing
different
versions
of
this
experiment.
For
the
last
few
meetings
at
the
last
meeting,
we
had
open
agenda
time
on
Wednesday
afternoon
had
a
big
chunk
of
open
time
and
based
on
survey
feedback
from
the
IETF
104
meetings
survey.
A
So,
after
every
meeting
we
do
a
survey
based
on
the
survey
feedback
from
last
time.
It
was
obvious
that
most
people
were
more
interested
in
more
shorter
slots
of
open
time
spread
throughout
the
week,
as
opposed
to
one
long
open
slot
on
Wednesday
afternoon.
So
that's
what
we
tried
at
this
meeting.
We've
had
open
time
every
morning
from
8:30
to
9:45,
with
unofficial
side
meeting
rooms
that
people
can
sign
up
for
on
a
first-come,
first-served
basis,
and
we
had
the
working
group
session
starting
at
10:00
o'clock
in
the
morning.
A
Even
with
this
amount
of
open
time
in
the
schedule,
we
still
had
plenty
of
slots
to
accommodate
the
number
of
working
groups
and
working
group
sessions
that
wanted
to
meet
in
order
to
figure
out
what
we're
gonna
do
next
and
if
we're
going
to
repeat
this
experiment
or
change
it,
we
need
more
feedback.
So
when
you
get
the
email
on
the
105
attendees
list
about
the
meeting
survey,
which
will
be
going
out,
hopefully
at
the
end
of
this
week,
please
fill
it
out.
Please
give
us
your
feedback.
A
A
We
hosted
hot
RFC
on
Sunday
evening,
so
this
is
a
two-hour
session
which
is
filled
with
lightning
talks
designed
to
encourage
brainstorming
help.
People
find
collaborators,
raise
awareness
about
new
ideas,
new
drafts,
new
initiatives
in
the
ITF,
promote
side
meetings
and
Barb
offs.
There
were
23
talks
and
the
proceedings
are
available
online
again.
This
is
one
of
those
events
that
seems
to
be
becoming
a
fixture
of
the
IETF
meeting
week
and
a
very
big
thanks
to
Erin
for
continuing
to
organize
it
so
capably.
A
So
I
wanted
to
spend
a
couple
of
minutes
talking
about
conduct
in
the
IETF.
There's
been
lots
of
discussion
on
the
IETF
mailing,
the
main
ITF
mailing
list
about
this
recently
and
lots
of
discussion
over
the
last
few
meeting
cycles
dating
back
to
ITF
the
IGF
103
plenary
that
we
had
at
the
end
of
last
year.
A
We
have
guidelines
for
conduct
in
the
ITF
they're
enshrined
in
BCP
54,
and
this
is
just
kind
of
the
top
line
from
that
RFC.
It
says
that
the
ITF
strives,
through
these
guidelines
for
conduct
to
create
and
maintain
an
environment
in
which
every
person
is
treated
with
dignity,
dignity,
decency
and
respect.
I
think
there's
actually
a
few
notable
things
about
even
just
this
one
sentence
in
particular.
This
word
strives
because
I
think
the
notion
of
creating
a
positive
and
enriching
culture
in
the
ITF.
A
It's
not
really
like
a
box
checking
exercise
it's
more
of
a
journey
and
it's
probably
a
journey
that
we
will
always
be
on.
It
doesn't
really
have
an
endpoint
I
think
for
some
people,
they've
noted
some
particularly
troubling
interactions
on
our
mailing
lists
lately
and
some
even
more
troubling
interactions.
A
Off-Off
lists
recently,
and
so
it
might
be
that
we're
at
a
particularly
challenging
moment
in
this
journey
for
me
I
think
that
means
it's
an
opportunity
to
for
all
of
us
to
think
about
what
we
can
do
to
course-correct,
to
make
improvements
to
learn
from
our
mistakes.
I
know
that
there's
certainly
things
that
I
can
do
better
and
there's
mistakes
that
I've
made
I
might
talk
a
little
bit
about
those
in
a
few
slides,
but
I
suspect
that
there's
things
that
we
can
do
collectively
as
well.
A
It's
been
revelatory,
even
for
me,
these
last
few
weeks
to
try
to
understand
the
the
full
scope
of
all
of
the
documents
that
we
have
that
describe
conduct
in
the
IDF,
and
there
are
actually
a
lot
of
them
and
they
go
back
a
long
time.
This
is
not
a
new
conversation.
This
is
a
conversation
that
the
ITF
has
been
having
for
at
least
20
years,
if
not
longer,
and
these
policies
are
not
necessarily
in
harmony
once
you
go
and
take
a
look
at
them.
A
In
1999,
then
we
have
the
ITF
discussion
list
charter,
RFC
1305,
which
was
written
in
the
year
2000,
and
that
one
talks
about
inappropriate
postings
on
the
ITF
mailing
lists
and
specifically
about
unprofessional
commentary,
and
that's
the
one
that
create
created
this
role
of
sergeant-at-arms
and
allows
the
ITF
chair
to
designate
people
to
serve
as
sergeant's
at
arm's.
Who
can
help
to
moderate
conduct
on
the
ITF
mailing
list.
A
We
have
the
guidelines
for
conduct
which
I
cited
at
the
beginning,
originally
published
in
2001.
That
document
was
Oxley
by
a
version
that
was
written
five
years
ago,
and
this
one
is
more
of
the
has
the
more
of
the
positive
valence
talks
about
the
aspirational.
What
we
you
know,
what
we
aspire
to
extending
respect
and
courtesy
to
our
colleagues
and
that
one
doesn't
really
have
any
enforcement
mechanism
or
or
personnel.
A
Then,
a
couple
of
years
ago
we
did
the
anti
harassment
policy
and
the
anti
harassment
procedures
and
that
one
is
more
focused
on
unwelcome
hostile
or
intimidating.
Behavior
actually
goes
into
some
great
detail
of
defining
what
behavior
that
constitutes,
and
that's
the
one
that
created
the
role
of
Ombuds
team,
to
field
confidential
complaints
about
behavior
among
individuals
and
then
last
thing.
A
There's
been
some
recent
activity
to
try
to
stimulate
a
more
positive
environment
and
there's
also
a
few
ideas
floating
around
just
this
week
and
going
past
going
back
a
few
weeks
that
I
wanted
to
let
people
know
about
so.
The
first
is
discussion
between
area
directors
and
working
group
chairs
about
encouraging
professional
behavior
in
the
working
groups.
This
goes
back
to
IETF
103
when
we
had
a
significant
plenary
discussion
about
this,
and
the
ISD
has
been
engaging
with
the
working
group
chairs
since
then
to
try
to
figure
out
some
guy.
A
Some
guidance,
essentially
to
help
working
group
chairs,
feel
empowered
to
intervene
when
they
see
bad
behavior
and
their
working
groups
and
to
try
to
encourage
people
to
to
be
polite
and
respectful.
So
that's
something
that
the
area
directors
are
socializing
essentially
one-to-one
with
their
working
group
chairs.
A
So
there
was
a
group
of
us
who
met
earlier
this
week
with
an
engineering
engineering
manager,
who's
responsible
for
positive
community
building
at
one
of
the
organizations
that
participates
in
the
IETF,
and
he
provided
an
incredible
wealth
of
insight
about
things
that
we
could
do.
He
had
read
two
months
worth
of
our
mailing
list,
so
he
was
well
educated
about
some
of
what's
going
on
here
and
I.
Think
we
may
continue
to
rely
on
his
guidance
and
potentially
seek
some
other
contacts
from
him
to
help
us.
You
know
develop
what
we
do
here.
A
We're
also
thinking
about
training
in
combination
with
that,
potentially
leveraging
some
professional
assistance
to
do
training
for
the
working
group
chairs
for
the
leadership,
possibly
for
others
who
might
be
interested
in
some
training
about
how
to
handle
specific
situations.
You
know-
maybe
some
roleplay
so
I'm
thinking
about
particular
scenarios
that
that
can
get
tricky
in
the
ITF.
A
There's
been
some
activity
around
rotating
the
sergeant's
at
arm's.
So
a
couple
of
years
ago,
in
in
May
of
2017,
we
got
two
new
sergeants
of
arms
after
the
previous
set
had
served
about
ten
years.
It's
time
for
a
refresh.
So
at
that
time,
Matt
Miller
and
Ben
Caidic
agreed
to
become
new
sergeant's
at
arm's
for
the
ITF
discussion
list,
people
may
know
Ben
Caidic
as
the
security
ad.
He
was
actually
the
sergeant
at
arms
first
before
he
became
the
security
ad.
A
So
if
you
don't
want
to
be
a
security
ad,
you
might
want
to
think
about
not
becoming
a
sergeant
at
arms,
because
apparently
that's
the
thing
that
happens,
but
basically,
since
Ben
joined
the
iesg
last
year,
he's
been
asking
me
to
replace
him
and
it
has
not
been
the
highest
priority.
On
my
list,
for
a
few
reasons,
there
were
other
things
going
on
as
one
of
those
reasons,
but
also
it
never
really
seemed
like
a
burning
issue,
because
we
have
two
sergeants
at
arms.
A
So
if
there
ever
seemed
like
there
was
a
situation
where,
where
it
didn't,
it
wouldn't
seem
correct
for
Ben
to
intervene,
then
we
always
had
Matt
and
of
course,
myself,
I'm
also
empowered
by
RC
3005
to
to
try
to
help
with
the
ITF
discussion
list.
So
as
many
things
in
the
ITF
didn't
seem
like
something
that
could
turn
into
a
burning
fire
until
it
ignited,
which
I
think
it
sort
of
has
recently
so
in
the
process
of
looking
for
a
new
sergeant-at-arms,
that's
already
started.
A
That
set
of
concepts
might
be
useful
and
then,
finally,
something
that
the
sergeant-at-arms
have
talked
about
this
week
and
I
think
the
working
group
chairs
may
have
as
well
is
clarifying
some
of
the
escalation
procedures.
So
in
the
past
it's
been
somewhat
ad
hoc.
As
to
you
know,
if
you
see
bad
behavior
on
a
mailing
list,
do
you
email
off
list?
First,
do
you?
How
do
you
send
the
signal
to
the
rest
of
the
community
that
something's
being
dealt
with
off
list
at
least
I'm
on
the
sergeant's?
At
arm's?
It's
been
someone
ad
hoc
like.
A
If
we
had
already
sent
a
general
warning
on
list,
then
maybe
we
would
carry
forward
on
list,
but
it
hasn't
been
consistent
in
every
case
and
I.
Think
that's
quite
problematic
and
that's
that's
on
us
to
fix.
So
that's
I
think
something
that
that
we
can
try
to
do
across
the
board
in
terms
of
being
more
clear
about
what
the
escalation
procedures
are
for
all
these
different
bodies
that
that
handle
conduct
in
the
IETF,
so
those
are
just
some
things
that
have
been
going
on
and
some
other
potential
new
ideas.
A
C
C
We
have
11
fully
chartered
research
groups,
three
proposed
research
groups.
Six
of
these
are
still
to
meet
later.
In
the
week
we
have
the
crypto
forum,
research
group,
the
computation
in
the
network
proposed
research
group,
the
network
management
group,
the
network
coding
group,
half
aware
networking
and
the
measurement
and
analysis
of
protocols
are
finishing
up
on
Friday.
If
you're
interested
in
any
of
these
topics,
please
do
get
you
go
along.
C
In
addition
to
the
research
groups,
we
run
an
academic
conference
called
the
applied
networking
research
workshop,
which
we
organized
in
collaboration
with
ACM
sitcom.
This
took
place
earlier
this
week
on
the
Monday
we
had
about
200
people
attending
the
workshop,
really
nice
set
of
papers
which
are
all
up
online.
We're
hoping
to
do
this
again
next
year,
at
the
summer,
ITF
in
Madrid
next
summer,
look
out
for
the
call
for
papers
just
after
Christmas,
most
likely.
C
Finally,
we
also
run
the
applied
networking
research
prize.
This
is
a
prize
awarded
for
recent
research
results
in
applied
networking
research
which
are
relevant
to
bringing
into
the
a
IETF
the
IETF
community.
We
are
two
really
nice
talks.
Yesterday
met
Sir
Rosen
chef
gave
a
talk
on
NTP
security
with
paper
on
a
protocol
on
implementation
of
NTP
called
Chronos
and
CJ
Chung.
Give
it
a
really
nice
talk
on
the
role
of
registers
and
DNS
SEC
deployments.
C
We'll
have
a
couple
more
of
these
price
talks
at
the
next
IETF
in
Singapore
and
in
addition,
the
nominations
for
the
2020
applied.
Networking
research
price
will
open
in
September
October
time
frame.
So
if
you
know
of
any
good
applied
networking
research
papers,
please
look
out
for
the
call
for
nominations
and
let
us
know
so
we
can.
We
can
bring
those
people
into
the
the
IETF,
the
IRT
f
community
next
year.
Thank
you.
D
D
With
this,
I
have
been
working
with
with
the
community
with
the
RFC
production
center,
with
really
just
about
anybody
I
can
on
taking
us
from
the
plaintext.
Ask
you
only
rfcs
that
we've
been
using
for
the
last
40-plus
years
to
XML
as
the
the
unchanging
underlying
format
and
having
outputs
of
text.
Pdf
a3
is
our
rifle
target
and
HTML
allowing
SVG
lineart
in
black
and
white.
No
we're
not
going
to
do
color,
because
color
is
thinking
hard
and
allowing
non
ASCII
characters.
D
We're
now
at
that
sort
of
that
last
little
bit
of
aligning
parts,
but
the
RSC
production
Center
is
is
targeting
the
end
of
August
this
year,
not
this
this
August
to
try
and
be
ready
to
be
ready
to
publish
v3
documents.
Now
whether
the
tools
will
be
ready.
Rather,
the
ndn
process
will
be
ready.
There's
still
a
couple
of
open
questions
about
some
details
in
the
vocabulary.
D
Whether
all
of
that
will
finally
align
is
a
definitive,
maybe
but
I'm
still
very
much
hoping
that
we'll
see
we'll
see
the
capabilities
available
come
end
of
August
I
want
everyone
to
expect
that
this
is
going
to
introduce
several
months
of
debugging,
as
we
all
learn
some
new
and
interesting
features,
and
what
to
expect
out
of
the
new
format
and
it's
going
to
increase
the
workload
for
pretty
much.
Everybody
involved
for
the
authors,
who
have
more
things
to
review
for
the
editors
within
the
RSC
production
center,
who
also
have
a
lot
more
things
to
review.
D
There's
a
couple
of
key
links
on
these
slides
and
if
you
as
I,
told
the
working
group
chairs
today,
if
you
take
nothing
else
away
from
my
talk,
I'd
really
like
you
to
be
looking
at
the
XML
to
RFC
v3
FAQ.
It
answers
a
lot
of
questions
that
people
come
to
the
desk
and
ask
about
and
I
think
it
will
help
you
and
and
your
authors
and
your
doc
Shepherds
and
really
just
about
everybody
to
understand.
D
What's
going
on
a
couple
other
really
quick
things
that
I'll
jump
through
since
I
know,
we
are
tight
on
time.
Last
time,
I
mentioned
the
service
level
agreement
that,
with
the
increased
workload,
it
was
extremely
unlikely
that
we
would
be
meeting
that
later
this
year
now
the
LLC
board
has
approved
temporarily
two
additional
editors
and
we're
still
searching
for
those,
as
it
turns
out
the
type
of
copy
editors
that
the
RFC
production
center
needs
to
edit
IETF
documents
are
rather
specialized
beasts
and
it's
a
little
challenging
to
to
find
folks.
D
D
So
let's
acknowledge
that
we
can't
really
say
here's
how
much
time
it
will
take,
because
the
tools
are
still
in
process.
We
just
don't
know
so,
hopefully
that
the
goal
is
to
just
understand
that
reality
get
that
documented
for
future
reference
and
move
on
I
have
been
sending
out
satisfaction,
surveys.
D
The
whole
purpose
of
that
is
vendor
evaluation
and,
as
probably
no
big
surprise,
the
we
don't
get
a
lot
of
response
about
17%
response
rate.
Almost
everybody
has
been
very
happy
with
the
RFC
editor
I.
Think
we've
gotten
one
response
that
said:
well,
it
was
okay,
but
it
would
be
better
if
you
use
github.
D
So,
in
terms
of
the
narrative
trends,
because
they're
sort
of
just
this
open
space
of-
if
you
could
do
one
thing
to
improve
this-
you
know
what
what
would
you
see
done?
Really,
the
one
thing
that
we
hear
consistently
is
improve
off
48.
Now
what
improve
off
48
means
pretty
much
I.
Think
every
individual
who's
ever
put
something
through
the
queue
has
a
different
opinion
on
what
that
means.
So
this
is
a
really
big
project
and
I
highly
recommend
that
this
be
sort
of
the
the
priority
for
where
we're
my
biggest
priority.
D
I
ended
up
being
in
terms
of
projects.
The
format
work,
I
think
this
is
your
next
big
thing
that
you
should
pay
attention
to
to
relieve
this
particular
friction
from
the
RSC
publication
process,
and
someone
did
say
that
more
chocolate
would
be
helpful.
Just
just
noting
that
one
wanted
to
note
that
there
is
a
projects.
D
If
those
of
you
who
are
following
tools
that
may
know
about
the
inline
errata
project
code
has
been
written
by
soaring
hot,
consulting
that's
Jim
shod
to
create
files
with
erotic
Corrections
in
line
verified
only
this
is
very
sandbox
II
and
we're
doing
everything
we
can
to
highlight
the
fact
that
no,
you
can't
refer
to
these
as
the
final
document,
but
enough
people
find
this
to
be
just
useful
implementation,
help
that
we
want
to
make
that
available.
So
that's
that's
something
that's
happening
now.
I
do
have
a
call
for
comment
open.
D
Elephant
in
the
room.
The
RFC
series
editor
society
not
to
renew
contract
at
the
end
of
2019.
I
thought
it
would
be
just
it
was
fun
to
put
together
a
what.
What
have
we
accomplished
because
it
wasn't
just
me
it
was
this
room.
It
was
the
a
RFC
production
center
and
we've
done.
We've
done
some
pretty
major
things.
Every
year
since
I
started,
we've
got
and
finally
gotten
a
new
website.
I,
don't
know
if
you
all
some
of
you
might
remember
the
old
website.
D
That
was
a
little
disappointing
for
a
technical
organization
to
offer
a
stye
updating
a
style
guide
which
we
had
been
working
against
the
draft
on
for
a
very
long
time
getting
digital
object.
Identifiers
assigned
this
was
very
important
in
particular
to
the
IRT
F,
going
through
the
RFP
process
to
award
the
RFC
production
Center
in
publisher
RFPs,
be
getting
the
format,
specifications
published
and
sorted
out
developing
digital
archive
partnerships.
D
Digital
archiving
is
actually
a
pretty
specialized
field
and
it
wasn't
while
that
is
one
of
the
key
reasons
that
the
RFC
editor
exists,
to
maintain
the
archive
of
this
material
ongoing
in
the
future.
It's
not
really
our
area
of
specialty,
so
we've
partnered
with
the
commuter
Computer
History
Museum
and
with
the
National
Library
in
Sweden
to
just
keep
ingesting
our
documents
and
make
sure
we
have
other
ways
that
they
can
be
stored
in
perpetuity
and
the
new
RFC
format
rolling
out
this
year.
I
really
wanted
to.
Thank
you.
D
F
D
F
D
G
H
So,
as
you
know,
one
of
the
things
the
a
stands
for
disappointments
in
this
case
we
wanted
to
let
the
community,
you
know
that
Russ,
Hasley
and
Barry
liebe
would
be
reappointed
to
the
CCG
that
Richard
Barnes
will
serve
a
second
term
on
the
ice.
Awkward
thank
you
for
service
there
and
that
Jim
Reed
has
been
reappointed
to
the
I
can
or
zurk.
The
last
thing
on
the
appointment
slide
is
that
the
ad
is
also
currently
seeking
feedback
on
the
ITF
delegate
to
the
ICANN
2020
NomCom.
H
The
previous
person
was
timed
out,
so
these
are
all
new
candidates.
Please
do
take
a
look
on
the
document
side,
RC,
85,
46
and
RC
8558
we're
sure.
During
this
period
we
actually
talked
about
them
in
the
draft
stage
and
last
one
so
I'm
not
going
to
them,
as
Heather
just
pointed
out.
50
years
of
our
C's
is
currently
in
community
commentary,
there's
also
some
other
ones:
the
harmful
consequences
of
the
robustness
principle,
the
principles
for
operation
of
a
a
Anna
registries
that
one
in
particular,
is
just
an
update
to
deal
with
VI
asset
changes.
H
Both
the
stack
evolution
and
privacy
and
security
programs
have
been
operating
for
a
number
of
years
and
they
have
fulfilled
their
basic
goals.
Each
of
them
was
an
evolution
of
a
previous
set
of
programs,
and
our
current
plan
is
to
conclude
both
of
those
in
the
near
future
and
then
carry
out
any
future
work
in
other
programs
or
structures.
Just
like
know,
there
were
two
workshops
in
the
recent
timeframe:
DDR
Tedder
was
hosted
by
Nokia
in
Finland
in
June
and
a
bunch
of
the
expressions
on
it
all
the
papers
are
online.
H
Please
feel
free
to
take
a
look
among
the
ones
that
we
think
are
most
pressing
or
really
that
the
architectural
changes
in
find
moving
functionality
up
the
stack
mean
that
we're
likely
to
see
changes
in
deployment
patterns
that
result
in
consolidation
and
centralization.
Those
in
turn
create
fragility
and
other
kinds
of
concerns.
You
heard
some
one
security
concerns
earlier
today.
I
H
In
the
global
internet
report,
so
the
last
slide
on
this
builds
on
what
heather
was
saying
earlier
about
the
RFC
centered
series
editor
search.
First,
we
regret
that
we're
having
to
do
a
search.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
we
engage
in
an
open
discussion
with
you
on
how
we
can
move
forward.
There's
a
lot
of
time
at
the
end
of
this.
For
that,
but,
as
noted
in
a
conversation
with
John
cleanse
in'
and
again
with
brian
carpenter
later,
we
don't
think
that
that
conversation
is
going
to
end
tonight.
H
There
are
other
people
who
can't
be
in
this
room
with
us,
either
for
Geographic
reasons,
time
reasons
or
because
they're
parts
of
communities
who
are
customers
rather
than
authors
of
RFC's,
and
it
will
take
some
time
to
carry
out
that
conversation.
There
is,
however,
a
time
critical
decision
to
be
made
on
whether
to
go
ahead
with
the
recruitment
of
a
newer
rse
to
facilitate
the
discussion
on
what
changes
might
be
made
and,
in
particular
to
be
present
in
the
system
until
community
discussion
on
the
larger
issues
may
have
concluded
the
other
possibility.
H
There
is
to
leave
the
RFP
unissued
for
a
period
of
time,
while
the
community
discussion
goes
forward
and
one
of
the
things
that
we're
hoping
to
do
is
have
a
bit
of
discussion
tonight
to
kick
off
that
particular
time
critical
part
of
it.
Olaf
Copeland,
who
served
as
the
acting
RSC
earlier
and
is
one
of
the
two
editors
of
the
currently
governing
document.
H
66
35
will
present
a
very
short
review
of
the
current
model
for
those
of
you
who
may
not
understand
how
the
different
moving
parts
work
together
and
some
of
it
is
pretty
complicated,
and
we
hope
then,
to
use
the
Open
Mic
time
productively
to
see
how
we
can
make
this
go
better
in
the
future.
Thank
you.
J
J
And,
of
course,
we
couldn't
hold
the
meeting
without
the
equipment
and
I'm
sure
God.
You
all
had
a
chance
to
make
it
to
the
Hoff
earlier,
but
it's
that
equipment
that
it's
donated.
Other
sponsors
that
really
make
it
make
each
meeting
I'm
seamless,
because
the
meaning
the
equipment
is
taken
from
one
place
or
the
other,
and
it
just
makes
a
big
difference
in
how
the
Internet
is
coming
into
into
the
venue
and
in
particular,
for
this
meeting.
J
J
J
J
J
J
And
this
is
a
quick
meetings
snapshot
of
what's
going
on
so
far
paid
attendance
is
10,
1059,
remote
participant
651.
These
are
ello
eyes
that
were
issued
166
and
then
for
registration
revenue
at
779
105,
which
is
97,000
730
above
the
budget.
So
we
are
really
happy
about
that
and
then
sponsorship
came
just
under
our
target,
but
those
numbers
and
again
the
registration
breakdown.
K
Thank
you
very
much
Alisa.
So
we've
gotten
a
lot
done
so
we've
been
in
place
now
for
four
months
and
bootstrapping.
An
organization
is
always
fun
and
there's
a
lot
of
work
activity
the
beginning
and
we're
in
that
highly
intensive
phase.
So
I
have
a
bunch
of
updates
to
provide
first,
who
was
on
the
board.
You'll
see
some
of
us
on
the
stage
Peter
later
on,
Peter
is
remote,
so
you'll
see
him
on
the
video
screen
and
Maya
is
here
as
well.
K
K
First,
we're
trying
to
provide
a
lot
more
advance
notice
of
when
we're
meeting
and
then
what
we're
going
to
be
working
on
so
we're
doing
a
lot
better
in
terms
of
publishing
an
advance
schedule
of
meetings
and,
of
course,
agendas
we're
working
to
get
better
there.
So
that's
one
of
the
improvements
that
community
asked
for
we've
gotten
a
lot
of
work
done,
so
we
had
a
two-day
board
meeting
in
May
to
kick
everything
off.
K
We
did
some
assessments
to
basically
look
at
our
strengths
and
weaknesses
as
an
organization
and
the
external
environment
and
how
it
may
affect
the
ITF
in
the
long
term
and
how
we
want
to
mitigate
those
risks.
To
the
extent
there
are
any
we
issued
a
bunch
of
RFPs,
we
began
a
search
for
an
executive
director
and
I'll,
give
detailed
updates
on
some
of
these
later
we
put
in
place
a
whole
bunch
of
insurance
coverages
that
are
required
and
that
we're
also
recommended
we
began
a
policy
consultation
process
and
created
a
consultation
process
as
well.
K
Of
course,
we
had
the
unexpected
export
regulation,
thing
come
up,
and
so
we
had
to
deal
with
that
on
an
ad-hoc
basis
and
we've
done
some
contract.
Extensions
and
I'll
talk
later
about
the
last
item.
So
in
the
next
few
months,
what
is
the
next
few
months?
Look
like
for?
We've
got
an
executive
director,
a
permanent
one,
to
put
in
place.
K
We
need
to
institute
and
finalize
the
policies
that
we
have
and
a
bunch
of
other
things
that
are
here,
it's
a
lot
and
so
I'm
going
to
talk
about
some
of
the
details
in
a
second.
This
is
the
budget
and
where
we
stand
all
of
these
every
time
that
we
meet
every
month,
we
publish
these
suffice
to
say
basically
we're
on
budget.
That's
really
the
key
message
here.
You
don't
need
to
know
much
more
for
now.
The
budget
process
for
2020
is
about
to
begin
and
I
guess.
K
I
would
really
say
to
the
interim
board
that
preceded
us.
Thanks
for
putting
us
in
a
good
position
and
thanks
for
I
Sauk
support
and
sponsor
support,
you
know
for
basically
putting
us
on
a
firm
footing
for
this
year,
where
we
don't
feel
like
we've
just
formed,
and
we
have
to
go
ask
for
more
money
or
something
like
that.
So
2020
budgeting
will
be
important
for
us
in
terms
of
operating
reserve.
This
has
been
talked
about
before
we
have
one
that's
good.
K
As
of
now,
it's
really
invested
in
in
short-term
instruments,
and
so
one
of
the
two
new
items
or
actions
that
we
have
is
to
develop
an
investment
policy
strategy
to
really
guide.
What
do
we
do
with
that
money?
How
much
of
it
has
to
be
in
a
short
term
investment?
So
you
can
get
at
it
quickly
if
you
need
to
in
an
emergency
versus
what
can
be
invested
in
a
more
long
term
basis
in
terms
of
the
endowment.
This
is
really
new
news.
So
thank
you
to
I
sock.
K
Just
days
ago,
they
were
able
to
complete
the
transition
of
the
ietf
endowment
from
the
Internet
Society
to
the
ITF,
and
that
was
a
big
deal
took
a
lot
of
doing
on
the
part
of
I
Sauk
staff,
and
we
really
appreciate
that.
I
will
say
that
these
numbers,
as
you
look
at
them,
probably
don't
make
much
sense.
In
some
cases
they
don't
really
quite
add
up
because
of
some
of
the
oddities
here
and
I
will
sort
of
say.
The
key
here
is
that
the
current
balance
is
what's
important
to
pay
attention
to.
K
We
have
roughly
three
million
dollars
in
the
endowment
and
if
our
goal
is
to
be
able
to
fund
annual
operations
out
of
the
income
generated
by
the
in
the
endowment,
we
have
nowhere
near
enough
money.
So
we
need
to
really
in
the
next
few
months
and
the
next
year
develop
a
strategy
for
how
are
we
going
to
go
about
more
funds
for
this
endowment
so
that
that
might
become
a
possibility
and,
of
course,
as
well?
How
should
that
money
be
invested
over
time,
similar
to
the
the
fund
that
we
talked
about
a
moment
ago?
K
This
reserved
for
the
endowment
itself.
We
need
an
investment
policy
and
at
the
at
the
current
time,
we've
really
just
mirrored
how
I
sock
had
that
money
invested
as
a
placeholder
until
we
can
get
to
focus
on
this,
so
we've
got
a
lot
to
do.
Of
course,
we
reached
out
to
the
major
donors
and
I
think
it's
important
to
recognize
their
generosity.
K
So
far,
that's
really
important,
both
the
individual
donors,
as
well
as
the
institutional
organizations
that
backed
the
endowment,
and
we
appreciate
that
and
we'll
be
working
with
them
as
we
develop
this
sort
of
future
strategy
and
figuring
out
what
new
organizations
might
be
future
donors
for
this,
the
Secretariat
services
RFP.
We
put
that
out.
Obviously,
the
current
secretary
that's
been
doing
a
fantastic
job.
This
meeting
is
another
example
of
how
smoothly
everything
just
runs.
K
It's
great
it
just
sort
of
happens
and
works,
which
is
wonderful,
but
we
didn't
happen
to
notice
that
the
current
contract
ended
first
rather
soon
and
also
a
matter
of
a
few
weeks
before
the
next
IDF,
meaning
we
thought
that
was
sort
of
problematic
and
unnecessarily
risky,
so
we
extended
it
to
the
end
of
the
year
and
that
gave
us
a
little
bit
more
time
to
issue
the
RFP.
The
other
thing
that
we're
trying
to
do
is
to
try
to
simplify
overtime,
the
way
that
some
of
the
contracts
are
structured
over
time.
K
Just
as
you
know,
things
happen,
a
lot
of
things
got
bundled
up
into
contracts
and
it
can
make
things
complicated
to
understand,
and
so
we've
tried
to
break
those
up.
It's
not
any
reflection
that
things
are
going
badly
in
any
sense,
it's
just
we're
trying
to
simplify
things
and
make
them
easier
to
manage
and
administer.
K
K
It
just
means
that
in
the
short
term
for
us,
we've
got
a
lot
of
work
to
do
to
sort
of
sort
through
all
of
those
candidates,
but
it's
amazing
to
me
and
I
think
we're
again,
as
I
said,
really
humbled
by
the
level
of
interest
in
that
and
it's
it's
really
great
policies
consultations.
So
we
began
that
in
the
early
part
of
June-
and
this
was
the
first
time
that
we
did
it
so
the
first
thing
we
did
up
front
said:
what
should
our
process
look
like
for
consultation?
K
This
came
out
really
in
the
eye
asset
to
working
group,
the
expectations
that
the
community
had
about
how
they
wanted
to
be
involved
and
consulted
with,
and
so
we
created
a
project
on
github.
That's
where
the
documents
went.
People
could
submit
issues
there
if
they
wanted
to.
We
also
created
a
general
consultation,
email
list
and
comments
could
go
there.
K
We
did
a
live
webinar,
which
was
then
recorded
and
available
for
people
to
watch
later
on
and
we
began
then
a
month-long
consultation
period
and
where
we
stand
now,
we've
been
a
bit
busy
preparing
for
this
meeting.
So
we've
collected
a
bunch
of
those
things
and
over
the
coming
weeks,
we'll
be
reviewing
them
and
then
deciding
which
of
the
policies
need
to
be
revised
and
whether
those
revisions
get
to
a
level
of
significance
where
we
need
to
go
out
again
for
consultation
and
I.
K
Don't
think
we
know
that
yet
and
then,
as
a
last
item,
not
only
do
we
then
have
to
implement
the
policies,
but
we
have
to
put
first
meaningful
training
or
information
sharing
about
what
those
mean
and
how
to
comply
with
them,
but
then
sort
of
a
checkup
checkup
compliance
policy
on
the
back
end,
so
that
we're
actually
following
those
things
which
is
important
so
I,
think
those
are
all
the
updates
here
or
other
many
many
ways
to
follow
us.
How
to
contact
us
and
the
stuff.
K
L
All
right,
this
will
be
a
quick
update
on
the
NomCom
committee
that
we're
forming
for
this
upcoming
selection
year.
First
of
all,
I
like
coming
to
Montreal
in
the
summer.
It's
a
much
nicer
time
of
year
and
it's
a
nice
place
to
gather
for
the
first
time
with
the
new
committee.
Sorry,
the
NomCom.
We
we've
got
our
NomCom
selections
in
terms
of
the
nominee
voting
members
and
non-voting
members
have
all
ready
to
go,
but
Madame.
All
this
week
has
been
great.
That
band
is
together
and
we're
ready
to
do
a
lot
of
work
this
year.
L
It's
a
lot
of
work
for
the
folks
they're
going
to
put
in
a
lot
of
time,
and
it's
I'm
very,
very
happy
with
momentum
we
have.
These
is
a
list
of
the
both
voting
and
non-voting
members.
If,
actually
you
don't
mind
standing
up
in
the
audience,
so
people
can
recognize
them
for
their
hard
work
as
they're
going
to
be
in
many
many
meetings.
L
They've
decided
to
slay
the
little
extra
for
the
next
year,
so
I'm
excited
as
we
get
going,
we've
convinced
them
to
volunteer
and
they
have
and
we
get
to
take
a
lot
of
feedback,
and
so
that
will
give
something
a
lot
of
time
reading
through
all
the
community
feedback
we
enjoy.
Having
a
lot
of
feedback
I'll
remind
the
community
many
times
that
we
will
love
to
have
feedback.
It's
the
way,
we're
able
to
understand
what
the
community
needs
and
wants,
and
for
us
to
be
able
to
do
the
right
thing
for
the
community.
L
For
this
upcoming
year
we
have
a
number
of
positions
to
fill
that
includes.
The
IAB
we
have
six
positions.
They're
listed
also
are
the
IHG
positions
and
the
area
director
positions
that
we're
going
to
fill
for
this
year.
We
are
also
going
to
fill
a
single
LLC
board
member
position
and
an
ITF
trust
position.
Those
are
three
years
selections,
whereas
the
standard
two-year
apply
for
the
IB
and
the
is
G.
L
When
we're
ready-
and
we
have
the
nominees
available,
we
will
do
the
call
in
August
I'll
pull
up
the
current
draft
schedule
in
a
moment.
We're
gonna
ask
you
need
to
go
up
to
the
website
and
please
bring
in
your
feedback.
Please
be
diligent
if
you
can
be
expressive
and
provide
as
many
details
you
can.
That
helps
us
kind
of
Whittle
through
and
understand
what
is
it
that
you're
thinking?
What
is
that
you
want?
L
This
is
a
quick
list.
It's
on
the
webpage
a
little
hard
to
read
here,
fonts
a
little
small,
but
we
have
a
proposed
schedule.
We'll
get
that
hardened
out
over
the
next
couple
of
the
weeks
and
get
that
make
sure
we
have
it
firmed
up
a
lot
of
work
as
we
get
into
the
next
couple
of
months.
We'll
get
the
questionnaires
done,
we'll
do
the
call
for
nominees
and
we'll
prepare
for
interviews
or
the
majority
of
interviews
in
Singapore,
so
it'll
be
a
big
week
for
the
NomCom.
L
Just
so
folks
understand
the
first
year,
which
was
last
year,
we
we
filled
three,
a
1,
a
2
and
a
3
year
role
for
both
the
I
IDF
trust
and
the
LLC,
and
that
was
to
be
able
to
seed
it.
So
we
can
have
a
single
nominee
moving
forward
each
successive
year.
So
this
year,
we'll
fill
the
one
role
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
but
last
year
we
had
done
the
three
a
one
time
basis
to
kind
of
seed.
It'll
have
an
offsetting
cast
of
board
members.
L
So,
as
a
reminder,
feedback
feedback
is
amazing.
I
put
it
three
times
there.
You
can
see
how
important
it
is.
The
other
thing
I
would
like
to
remind
everyone
is:
please
please,
please.
If
you
know
someone
was
qualified
and
you
think
that
they
would
be
a
great
candidate
for
one
of
the
roles.
Please
nominate
them.
You
can
technically
nominate
yourself
as
well
if
you
feel
you're
qualified,
but
please
look
around
talk
to
your
fellow
ITF.
Errs
it's
great
to
have
a
wide
cast
of
nominees.
It's
a
great
experience
to
go
through
it.
L
M
Good
afternoon
so
for
IT
f-106
nokia
will
be
pleased
to
welcome
you
in
Singapore.
So
no
care
is
not
immediately
related
to
Singapore,
but
we
do
have
a
location
out
there,
which
is
serving
the
Asian
market.
So
we
are
kind
of
locals
Singapore
in
November,
so
we
have
already
been
there.
We
know
how
it
is.
It
said,
an
enjoyable
place.
We
know
that
there
is
a
diverse
culture,
plenty
of
good
food
and
we
may
not
notice
when
we
are
freezing
in
our
meeting
rooms,
but
it's
also
tropical
weather
out
there.
M
So
you
will
find
out
that
there
are
tropical
forests
and
you
have
beaches,
so
you
can
get
ready
for
that.
If
you
don't,
you
shouldn't
have
too
busy
working
will
have
during
this
meet
the
meeting.
Will
you
have
a
social
event
just
across
the
bay
from
the
hotel
in
the
Singapore
art
science
museum?
They
have
an
exposition,
an
exhibition
called
future
world
where
art
meets
science,
which
is
very
apt
for
ietf
and
I.
Know
that
you
have
a
lot
to
discuss
tonight.
So
I
will
not
take
much
more
time.
See
you
in
Singapore.
Thank
you.
S
Hey
so
I
know,
there
are
a
lot
of
important
topics
coming
up.
I've
had
a
lot
of
people
care
really
deeply
about
I'm
excited
to
hear
everyone
and
I
wanted
to
recommend
in
the
interest
of
time
and
audibility
I'd
like
to
ask
folks
to
save
all
clapping
or
cheering
till
the
very
end.
Just
so,
we
can
hear
everything
that
everyone
has
to
say
thanks.
N
Leslie
deagle
Jason,
you
mentioned
in
your
remarks
that,
among
the
things
that
the
very
very
busy
new
LLC
board
is
doing,
is
looking
at
planning
how
to
simplify
the
contracts.
I
kind
of
like
to
hear
that
expressed
in
terms
of
what
is
a
strategic
level
objective
that
the
LLC
board
has,
and
how
is
your
new
executive
director
going
to
implement
it
so.
N
Is
the
LLC
board
worried
about
what
the
contracts
look
like?
It
seems
to
me
that
that's
dangerously
close
to
getting
into
the
kind
of
nitpicking
stuff,
as
opposed
to
the
high
level
strategic
stuff
that
the
LLC
board
was
designed
to
do.
But
I
may
have
missed
the
point
and
I'd
like
to
hear
how
you
have
a
strategic
objective
that
you're
going
to
get
the
new
executive
director
to
implement.
K
You
know
from
a
contract
standpoint.
It's
it's
sort
of.
You
know
the
more
complex
hated
that
you
make
a
contract
the
harder
it
is
to
understand
the
harder
it
is
to
make
sure
that
everyone
agrees
and
is
aligned
on
what
the
responsibilities
are
and
so
on
so
I
think.
That's
the
idea
and
breaking
them
apart
is
making
them
a
little
bit
simpler,
more
comprehensible,
okay,.
N
K
T
Compete
most
sorry
yeah,
so,
as
people
may
have
seen
on
the
IETF
list,
I've
put
out
a
draft
called
draft
fear.
We
got
to
stop
meeting
like
this
now.
The
purpose
of
that
trap
is
really
simply
to
engage
the
LLC
to
start
and
UD,
perhaps
to
start
thinking
about
new
modalities
of
how
we
should
be
meeting
with
an
eye
towards
not
only
effectiveness
but
also
how
we
preserve
the
environment
cost
and
a
litany
of
other
things.
T
The
purpose
of
the
draft
is
not
to
specify
answers,
in
fact,
I
don't
even
know
if
we
have
the
right
questions
in
the
draft,
but
rather
to
have
somebody
who
can
look
at
this
adult
in
a
long-term
way.
As
you
put
up
a
list
of
meeting
dates,
we
tend
to
get
back
up
in
terms
of
you
know,
thinking
three
four
or
five
years
in
advance,
so
any
change
we
might
want
to
even
consider
even
an
experimental
level
can
take
a
while.
T
K
I'll
say
certainly,
we
definitely
noticed
the
draft
I
thought
it
was
interesting
to
read
and
we're
watching
all
the
community
discussion.
So
you
know,
as
community
consensus
develops,
you
know
that
will
help
provide
direction
timing-wise
to
the
extent
that
we
wanted
to
follow
some
of
your
recommendations,
for
example
around
a
consultant
to
help
do
some
assessment
or
something
given
that
we're
beginning
the
budget
process
soon.
You
know
the
time
may
be
convenient
between
now
and
the
end
of
years.
K
A
Thing
you
know
we
have
a
meeting
location
policy
which
calls
for
a
specific
rotation
on
specific
time
skill.
So
there
is
some
intersection
between
your
proposal
and
that,
and
that
would
be
since
the
policy
documented
in
what
is
now
going
to
be
a
consensus
RFC.
That
would
be
a
matter
for
community
consensus
to
be
determined.
T
The
point
is
actually
just
to
figure
out
where
we
might
want
to
go.
The
the
draft
basically
calls
for
the
for
the
LLC
and
the
ISU
to
maybe
bring
some
ideas
back
to
the
community
and
then
to
take
it
forward
from
there
so
sort
of
step
by
step,
and
if
we
need
to
make
changes
in
documents
later,
we
do
that
later.
Okay,.
U
Bob
hi
I'm,
Bob,
Dean
didn't
so
nice
report
earlier
I'm
glad
we're
on
budget,
so
I
was
looking
at
the
budget
and
particular
I
was
comparing
it
against
the
previous
year's
budget,
and
so
what
I
noticed
is
that
the
previous
year,
the
total
expenses
were
a
little
over
seven
million
dollars:
seven
million
twenty
nine
five,
five,
five,
nine
nine,
but
the
expenses
for
this
year.
You
know
basically
the
first
LLC
budget,
whereas
almost
eight
point,
seven
million
dollars.
U
So
pretty
much
one
point:
six
million
dollars
more
to
have
the
LLC,
and
it
seems
like
quite
a
lot
to
me.
So
I
was
I
to
questions
relating
to
this
I'd
like
you
to
tell
us
why
it's
going
up
so
much
and
I'd
also
like
to
know
why
you
didn't
talk
about
this
ever
earlier,
because
it's
a
you
know,
pretty
significant
change.
That's
the
difference
is
close
to
the
cost
of
you
know,
I
mean
a
meaning
and
a
half
of
ITF
meetings.
It's
you
know,
yeah.
K
This
is
a
lot
of
money,
sure
sure
so
the
I'm
going
to
defer
to
our
treasurer
in
a
second
I
would
say
that
the
budget
was
developed
by
the
interim
board.
You
know
so
it
was
established.
You
know
late
last
year
and
I
think
has
been
discussed.
You
know
since
that
time,
but
Shawn
you
want
to
speak
to
I.
K
V
U
That's
a
pretty
general
answer:
I
would
like
to
sort
of
get
a
lot
more
specifics
from
that
to
understand.
What's
I
mean
this
is
a
significant
increase
in
the
overhead
costs
of
the
ITF,
so
I
think
you
know
I'm
not
expecting
you
to
do
it.
The
second
but
I
think
some
more
more
responses
of
why
why
these
extra
expenses
are
incurred
and
what
we're
getting
for
it,
and
you
know
why
it's
just
a
fact.
A
We
can
follow
up
in
more
detail,
but
just
a
few
things,
I
think.
As
you
know,
Bob
the
ITF
budget
has
increased
every
year
as
long
as
I
can
remember
not
by
this
much,
but
it's
not
as
if
the
entire
increase
is
attributable
solely
to
the
transition
to
the
LLC
because
it
increases
every
year.
We
did
talk
about
this
when
we
were
forming
the
LLC,
and
you
know
in
the
working
group
process
and
in
the.
A
I'm
the
only
person
here
who
was
on
the
interim
board
so
so
there
was
a
bunch
of
discussion
about
this
at
the
time
when
we
created
the
budget
a
year
ago
and
then
and
obviously
a
bunch
of
it
is
accountable
to
salaries
that
we
that
we
budgeted
for
this
year,
but
aren't
actually
paying
out
because
we
haven't
hired
the
people.
We
didn't
know
the
timing
of
the
hiring,
but
we
had
to
budget
as
if
it
was
a
whole
years
worth
of
expenditure,
even
though
the
people
haven't
been
hired
and
then.
A
I
Got
a
couple
minutes
left,
Mike
Bishop
I
wanted
to
follow
up
on
your
comment
that
the
endowment
needs
to
grow
further.
The
endowment
webpage
has
not
been
accepting
donations
since
around
the
end
of
last
year,
and
now
the
endowment
webpage
as
of
sometime
very
recently
gives
you
a
certain
error
and
then
a
404.
If
you
proceed
past
that
yep
I
kind
of
think,
if
we
want
more
money,
we
might
want
to
start
accepting
it
yeah.
K
So
you
know
that's
going
to
go
out
eventually
to
community
comment,
and
you
know
we're
in
an
interim
period
but
I
agree
I,
you
can't
accept
more
money
if
you
don't
have
a
page
to
accept
it.
I
think,
though,
at
the
same
time,
a
lot
of
the
the
places
that
we're
going
to
go
aren't
places
that
might
donate
on
a
webpage.
So
you
know
it
depends
what
our
target
audience
is
and
that's
part
of
that
assessment
that
will
do
do
you
have
a
timeline
for
that
it
certainly
you
know
hiring
and
smarf.
K
W
K
W
S
K
N
It
was
interesting
to
hear
that
you've
had
some
input
from
professional
communications
management.
People
I'd
be
curious
to
know
what
it
was
that
they
shared
with
you
and
you
know.
Could
you
share
it
with
us
and
in
a
large
part,
because,
while
I
recognize
this
is
the
is
G?
This
is
the
current
is
G
in
March.
There
will
be
a
slightly
different
eyes
she,
so
it's
sort
of
like
educating
all
of
us
educates
not
only
this
is
G,
but
all
future
ones
to
thanks
totally.
A
AE
Mana
Thompson
to
further
those
point,
I
think
that
I
personally
like
to
make
a
commitment
here
and
I
encourage
others
to
do
the
same.
I've
felt
constrained
for
in
the
recent
discussions.
I
didn't
feel
like
I
could
say
anything
and
I
realized
recently,
partly
in
the
conversation
with
Mike
that
we
had
earlier
this
week
that
standing
by
and
letting
this
bad
behavior
occur
is
me
being
part
of
the
problem.
AF
Dan
were
bandaged
about
the
some
feedback
from
Austrian
NomCom
member
recruiting
candidates
for
80
positions
is
really
hard,
as
you
probably
know,
but
I
really
want
the
whole
community
to
hear
that,
because
lately
it
was
a
very
interesting
comment
that
I
heard
try
to
get
some
people
to
nominate
for
a
B
and
asking
them
if
they
would
be
interested.
Oh,
it's
a
career
death
sentence.
I
still
want
to
do
development,
work
and.
AF
We
have
to
think
about
that
how
we
can
solve
that.
The
other
part
also
what
the
IDS
are
saying.
Well,
there's
one
thing
that
this
is
in
the
job
description
and
the
other
part.
What
is
the
actual
work
that
we
have
to
do?
There
is
a
very
specific
way
how
to
lead
a
volunteer
organization,
and
we
have
to
think
about
that.
Learn
how
to
do
that
and
then,
based
on
that
grow
and
groom.
You
know
the
potential
leaders,
but
it
is
I.
AF
A
I
think
I
mean
I,
think
we
agree
with
you,
I
think.
Hopefully,
no
one
up
here
feels
like
it's
a
death
sentence,
but
to
the
extent
that
people
feel
that
way,
that's
it
that's
a
major
issue.
It's
it.
It's
been
an
ongoing
discussion
in
the
IHG
and
and
we
would
welcome
the
discussion
with
the
community
about
it
as
well.
Okay,
I'm
gonna
cut
the
mic
line
because
we're
supposed
to
stick
to
ten
minutes
and
Kirsty
you're
next
Thank.
AG
You
Christy
PN
CSC,
so
I
just
wanted
to
echo
some
of
the
comments
that
been
said
about
conduct.
It's
been
really
good
to
see
that
being
taken
seriously
and
at
this
ITF
I'm
leading
this
as
well.
I
had
a
suggestion
you
just
mentioned
before
and
ways
to
prevent,
or
you
know,
tackle
bad
behavior
and
your
idea
here
so
I
just
wanted
to
pitch
my
idea,
which
was
to
create
an
everyday
sexism
style
and
that
everyday
IETF.
AH
Daniel
can
go
more,
so
I
am
very
happy
to
hear
that
this
community
is
starting
to
take
our
internal
conduct
more
seriously.
We
do
a
lot
of
work
in
the
public
and
we
are
an
extremely
unrepresentative
sample
of
the
people
who
depend
on
our
work
and
there
are
a
lot
of
people
who
might
be
interested
in
being
here
who
are
turned
off
by
all
kinds
of
stuff.
That
happens
here,
probably
just
the
technical
jargon,
but
the
the
aggressiveness
that
we
sometimes
treat
each
other.
AH
Even
when
we
know
each
other
well
is
really
off-putting,
especially
to
some
newcomers.
So
I
think
we
would
do
well
to
take
that
seriously
and
think
about
the
way
that
the
conduct
not
only
has
an
effect
on
those
of
us
who
are
here
and
I'm
sure
we've
all
been
burned
by
some
of
this
conduct,
but
I
hope
that
we're
thinking
about
the
conduct
in
respect
to
the
people
who
aren't
here
and
whether
we
want
more
people
to
join
us.
AH
A
AH
R
Anger,
Martin
and
EKG.
You
have
basically
said
everything
you
want
to
say,
but
I'm
gonna
say
it
again,
because
it's
worth
repeating
I've
been
with
this
community
for
19
years
and
I.
Don't
really
pay
attention
or
listen
to
the
ietf
mailing
list.
I'm
not
saying
this
because
I'm
proud
of
it
I'm
saying
this,
because
I
can't
keep
up
with
the
what
I
see
on
the
mailing
list.
Often
times
separately,
I
run
applaud,
but
I
won't
I.
I
do
want
to
say
that
this
is
what
I
saw
on
the
slides
was
very
encouraging.
R
This
is
to
me
the
leadership,
taking
some
some
action
on
sort
of
figuring
out
how
to
deal
with
conduct,
but
what
I
saw
on
the
slides
was,
more
so
more
of
a
safeguard
against
behavior.
Actually,
making
this
place
positive
and
encouraging
for
others
to
contribute
in
is
something
that
the
community,
each
one
of
us
has
to
do
and
to
that
extent
the
minimum
that
I
can
do
is
to
make
sure
that
if
I
see
somebody
being
abrasive
or.
F
Mark
Nottingham
I
have
a
suggestion,
I,
don't
know
if
it's
a
good
one
but
I
think
it's
worth
thinking
about,
and
John
referred
earlier
to
the
IETF
main
list.
It's
a
free-for-all.
I
appreciate
the
focus
on
behavior
that
we're
seeing
this
is
really
good,
but
I
can't
help
but
wonder
if
it's
really
represented
the
community.
More
anecdotally
I
hear
of
a
lot
of
people
who
don't
subscribe
to
it
because
they
find
it
too
gladiatorial
toxic.
F
AI
F
Seems
like
we
should
have
a
list,
that's
dedicated
to
that
purpose
and
much
more
heavily
moderated
than
the
IETF
main
list,
so
that
the
participants
who
can't
put
up
with
that
level
of
whatever
it
is,
can
still
go
and
have
a
voice.
In
last
call
of
discussions.
I
know
there
are
some
downsides
to
that,
but
I
think
it's
something
we
should
take
seriously.
Consider.
AB
I'll,
take
the
applause
and
lack
of
boos
to
support
for
what
Mark
said.
I
support
it
also
I
think
the
discussions
that
happen
on
the
IETF
list
are
important
discussions
and,
while
they
may
veer
off
into
the
weeds
in
particular,
discussions
might
be
annoying
on
the
whole.
We
need
it,
but
I
agree
completely
that
we
should
make
the
I
the
the
last
call
comments
and
the
threads
that
come
out
of
that
have
their
own
home.
So
I
would
like
to
support
that
I'd
like
the
iesg
to
do
that.
Yeah.
A
H
H
Z
AA
AG
AJ
Hello,
so
yeah,
my
name
is
Olaf
colic
mom
I
work
for
the
Internet
Society,
but
I
don't
speak
on
their
behalf.
I'm,
specifically
not
now
I'm
here
as
the
forming
a
former
acting
RFC
series
editor
and
also
as
a
co-editor
of
the
current
model.
The
RC,
a
data
model
version
2,
there's
something
to
unpack
in
here.
AJ
AJ
What
we
are
talking
about
when
we
have
the
discussion
at
mic
lines
in
a
few
minutes
from
now
so
part
of
a
longer
conversation,
a
conversation
that
started
50
years
ago,
and
it
has
gone
through
several
iterations
in
trying
to
institutionalize
it
in
a
way
that
is
suitable
for
the
community.
The
broader
community,
this
model
documented
in
RFC,
66
35,
has
now
been
in
operation
for
about
seven
years.
AJ
AJ
So
when
we
talk
about
the
RFC
editor,
we
we
talk
about
a
function,
a
function
that
used
to
be
performed
by
one
person,
but
that
has
evolved
and
what
the
RC
editor
essentially
does.
It
takes
raw
input
text
in
the
form
of
internet
rocks
and
it
spits
out
RFC's.
That
is
the
most
simplistic
way
of
thinking
about
the
RFC
earth.
AJ
Where
does
the
income?
The
input
come
from?
The
input
comes
from
you
in
the
form
of
ITF
documents,
as
approved
by
the
IHT
RTF
documents,
as
approved
by
the
RRS
IRS
G,
the
IAB
documents,
as
approved
by
the
IAB
and
the
independent
documents,
as
approved
by
the
in
the
method,
independent
submission
after
the
independent
submission
editor,
is
a
part
of
the
RC
model
that
we
are
discussing,
but
I'm
going
to
shift
that
apart.
This
is
all
input.
AJ
AJ
So
apologies
by
putting
it
here
like
this.
First,
your
internet
drafts
get
into
the
system
and
there
are
copy
edited
by
the
RFC
production
center,
the
RC
production
center
producing
RC
and
gives
that
RFC
to
another
entity,
which
is
the
RFC
publisher
and
they
publish
the
RFC
and
archive
it.
Those
two
functions
are
currently
operated
by
one
contractor,
which
is
AMS,
and
you
all
know
sandy
and
Alice.
They
are
the
people
who,
for
instance,
work
in
the
RC
production
center.
AJ
AJ
AJ
Representation
of
the
RC
series
towards
the
ITF
and
others,
including
the
development
of
our
simulated
policy.
In
the
wider
context,
this
is
what
have
there
has
been
doing
in
the
report
that
you
just
saw
was
an
aspect
of
that
development
of
RC
production
and
publication.
So
how
do
we
evolve?
How
we
produce
our
FCS
and
how
we'll
do
it
publish
them?
The
errata,
for
instance,
is
an
example
of
that
and
the
development
of
the
RC
series
itself
discussions
about
streams
about
new
new
types
of
content.
AJ
Community
many
of
these
functions
are
ultimately
overseeing
on
behalf
of
the
wider
community
by
the
IAB.
The
Ivey
has
a
chartered
responsibility
in
oversight
of
the
RC
series,
and
the
way
that
of
this
implemented
is
that
the
RFC
has
created
a
DV.
The
the
IAB
has
delegated
a
lot
of
the
responsibility
to
the
RC
series.
Oversight
Committee.
AJ
This
is
sort
of
how
the
oversight
and
responsibilities
are
working.
So
at
a
bottom
you
have
the
two
should
have
published
the
production,
the
publication
function,
the
contracts
maintained,
the
contractor
is
AMS,
and
contracts
in
this
diagram
are
all
with
the
LLC.
That
was,
of
course,
the
IOC
wounds.
Rc
was
written,
so
that's
the
orange
lines
or
the
lines
that
come
from
the
right,
I'm,
not
quite
sure
if
orange
and
green
is
seen
by
everybody
I,
just
those
are
the
lines
coming
down
from
the
right.
AJ
Those
are
contractual
relationships,
those
are
budget
oversight,
matters,
RFC
48:44
speaks
about
administration,
on
oversight
by
the
IFC
and
policy
oversight
by
the
IDE,
and
so
the
strategy
and
substance
is
our
seen
by
the
IAB.
But
that
is
all
in
conversation,
of
course,
the
developed
in
conversation
with
the
community
at
large
and
there's
a
book
in
this
slide.
The
community-at-large
arrows
go
one
way.
Of
course
they
should
go
two
ways.
There
is
interaction
that
is
supposed
to
be
a
conversation.
AJ
Board
that
was
in
my
speaking
notes,
and
I
was
about
to
say
the
astute
observer
would
say
there
is
no
RC
series
advisory
group.
That's
simply
because
the
the
model
doesn't
prescribe
that
group.
It
is
an
advisory
group
that
is
acting
on
behalf
of
the
RFC
series,
editor,
the
s
of
what
is
the
right
wording
here.
So
if
you
hear
about
the
r
seck
RC
series
advisory
group,
that
would
be
a
box
that
is
hanging
off
the
RC
series
editor,
but
really
informs
that
function.
AJ
H
AL
Lynch
so
I
thank
all
Olaf
for
this.
There
are
some
places
in
the
model
and
that
I
might
argue
with
him
a
bit.
I
actually
think
the
RFC
editor
is
a
role
not
just
a
function.
I
actually
think
the
series
in
itself
is
a
box
along
with
the
IAB
and
the
iesg
I
think
it
creates
the
idea.
So
for
me,
stewardship
of
the
aisle,
the
RFC
series
and
protection
of
the
independence
and
the
integrity
of
the
RFC
editor
as
a
role
are
extremely
important.
AL
H
I
certainly
agree
with
you.
The
RFC
editor
is
itself
a
role,
but
it's
also
a
role
that
has
been
shared
among
multiple
other
roles
in
this
current
model.
Now
you
asked
me
what
I
thought
the
role
of
the
RSC
editors
and
they
the
way
I
look
at
it.
From
a
metaphor,
perspective
is
sort
of
like
a
town
planner.
If
you
think
about
what
we
do,
we're
the
construction
workers
we
build.
H
The
houses,
what
the
RFC
production
center
does
is
they
come
through
and
make
sure
that
everything
in
the
houses
is
up
to
code
and,
if
necessary,
they
help
us
bring
it
up
to
code
if
it
isn't
the
world
the
RSC
plays
is
more
like
a
town
planner.
She
doesn't
get
into
the
details
of
whether
any
particular
document
is
up
to
code.
H
She
helps
make
sure
that
the
codes
are
modern
and
she
helps
make
sure
that
the
outputs
from
the
city
are
well
under
well
connected
to
the
rest
of
the
world
that
the
roads
coming
in
and
out
of
the
city.
In
this
case
the
publication
venues
in
which
the
RFC
editor
sorry,
the
RFC
publications,
are
understood
that
all
of
those
work
well.
H
So
as
stewards
of
that
function-
and
you
know
as
Brian
carpenters-
put
this
the
kind
of
stewardship
that's
involved
in
that
has
gone
through
multiple
steps.
The
main
thing,
too,
that
we
have
to
do
as
stores
is
to
make
sure
it
keeps
going
we're
not
experts
in
town
planning,
we're
not
experts
in
publication.
Our
job
is
to
make
sure
that
with
the
community
and
with
the
our
sock
that
the
function
keeps
going
so
that
the
individually
built
houses
each
draft
remains
part
of
a
functioning
whole.
The
city
or
the
series
does
that
make
sense.
AL
H
And
I
appreciate
that
I
will
say
that
it's
never
a
good
idea
to
let
the
people
who
are
building
the
houses
to
write
the
code,
there's
always
a
risk
there.
You
do
want
independence
and
I
recognize
that
so
I
think
that
the
order
was
actually
John
was
next
and
then
up
to
the
front
like
the
French
on
the
police
way.
We.
P
Don't
know
what
started
that
shift
or
how
we
got
there.
But
I
noticed
that
the
the
IAB
has,
over
the
last
several
years,
completely
were
populated
our
sock
and
I'd
like
to
better
understand
why
that
was
done
and
how
the
mandate
and
your
expectations
of
the
our
sock
in
the
RIC
changed
in
the
process.
H
Thank
you,
so
the
curve
seen
66
35
doesn't
actually
tell
the
IAB
on
what
schedule
to
repopulated
or
how
to
do
it,
and
so
the
IAB
has
done
it
on
a
periodic
basis.
Essentially
in
the
past
four
or
five
years,
every
two
years
and
looked
for
new
volunteers
or
looked
to
refresh
the
program.
The
last
time
through,
we
did
a
standard
program
refresh,
which
means
that
we
called
call
for
volunteers
for
the
whole
program
got
many
volunteers.
H
And
we've
proposed
to
the
community
that
we
switch
that
if
there
are
not
more
major
changes
to
a
rotating
membership
for
three
year,
fixed
terms
with
renewal
that
make
sure
that
we
never
refresh
all
of
the
are
sock
again
at
any
one
time
and
I
think
that
that
is
sort
of
a
structural
change.
That
will
help
make
sure
that
the
lessons
we
learn
from
this
aren't
as
easy
to
lose,
because
I
do
think
you're
right.
H
Think
in
particular,
it
occurs
when
you're
around
these
moments
of
contract
and
contract
renewal,
and
it's
because
in
those
cases
it
causes
people
who
have
standard
business
arrangements
to
say:
hey,
I,
understand
what
oversight
means
when
I'm,
making
a
contract
or
I
understand
what
oversight
means
when
I'm
hiring
a
person
that
we
lost
some
of
the
nuance,
that
what
oversight
was
meant
to
mean
was
something
different
here
and
I
think
that
what
we're
looking
to
figure
out
I
mean.
Obviously
this
whole
process
has
been
a
forceful
reminder
that
the
community
has
a
different
expectation
here.
H
How
we
make
sure
that
this
becomes
reflected
in
the
documents
in
a
way
that
it's
part
of
this
structures,
because
it's
it's
pretty
obvious.
We
had
people
with
five
three
two
years
of
experience
on
on
the
air
sock,
but
the
Lord
didn't
get
carried
forward
in
the
program
enough
I
think
it
has
to
be
in
the
documents
in
themselves
and
I.
P
In
addition
to
that,
and
I
will
make
this
very
brief,
there
was
a
shift
from
expecting
there
to
be
serious
publication
strategy,
expertise
on
the
our
sock
that
got
lost
somewhere
in
the
process,
and
that
also
may
be
a
matter
of
not
having
written
things
down
enough.
It
may
be
a
matter
of
not
enough
institutional
memory
on
the
IAB,
but
to
the
extent
to
which
one
wants
that
historical
quote,
oversight
and
quote
rule
that
has
to
be
expertise
there,
which
is
above
and
beyond.
Very
sincere
members
of
the
community,
want
to
help
with
this.
AA
O
O
Okay,
so
I
think
having
risk
management
started
at
that.
Early
phase
could
have
helped,
but
I
am
asking
that
to
Ted
and
Alissa
not
to
the
are
Sauk,
because
I
view
this.
This
is
really
a
a
level
above
that,
in
terms
of
where
we're
we're
replacing
risk
management
functions
and
having
the
process
that
goes
up
through
the
business
to
people
who
are
responsible
right
to
make
those
business
decisions.
H
Thank
you
for
the
comment.
I
think
I
might
need
to
follow
up
with
you
a
little
bit
more
offline
about
exactly
how
your
modeling
risk
management,
because
I
think
what
you
mean
by
it
might
not
be
quite
what
I
understand
it.
But
given
the
mic
lines,
if
you
don't
mind,
I'd
like
to
take
the
further
detail.
O
A
You
sorry
I
mean
happy
to
have
more
follow-up
on
this,
but
the
one
thing
I'll
say
at
least
my
understanding
of
RFC
66
35
is
like
a
very
strong
presumption
of
delegation
to
the
are
sock
for
all
of
these
matters
and
I.
Think
that
was
by
design
like.
Why
would
you
have
two
committees
overseeing
you
know
having
any
oversight
role
over
a
single
individual
if
they
weren't
supposed
to
have
functionally
different
roles?
AL
Thank
you
very
much.
This
question
is
for
Lissa.
As
you
go
forward,
you've
asked
us
to
think
about
going
forward
and
I'd
like
to
see
what
your
arc
isn't
going
forward.
Alyssa
we
had
a
and
I
near
in
a
unique
position,
since
you
said
both
on
the
is
G
and
Ivy
and
I'm
sure
Ted
I'd
love
to
hear
this
from
you,
but
we
had
an
RF
C++
bought
to
work
on
our
main
output,
which
is
RFC's.
What
was
your
conclusion
from
that
off
and
how
did
you
come
to
it?
A
Sure
I
mean
I
think
it
was.
It
was
a
bit
more
of
an
IB
initiative
than
anything
else,
but
I
think
I
think
it
was
very
clear
feedback
from
the
boss
that
the
topics
that
were
raised
were
squarely
in
the
province
of
the
RFC
series
editor
and
she
agreed
to
take
them
on
and
work
on
them
and
I.
Think
that
was
I
mean
in
the
realm
of
you
know,
clarity
of
results
from
above
it's
one
of
the
clearest
results
I've
seen.
So
that
was
good
outcome.
A
AL
AL
A
So
yeah,
so
so
I
don't
think
the
operate
topic
was
related
to
the
Boff,
but
I
will
say
that,
as
far
back
as
year-and-a-half
ago,
Heather
and
I
were
talking
about
the
the
RPC
performance
evaluation,
and
this
was
the
main
topic
that
that
came
up,
that
it
would
be
great
to
get
going
on
revisions
to
our
48,
and
you
know,
I
knew
that
it
was
sort
of
as
the
next
project
after
the
the
format
transition.
So
from
my
personal
individual
perspective,
I
think
that's.
A
That
seems
like
a
fantastic
next
project,
but
it's
not
really
I
mean
my
opinion.
Isn't
really
the
one
that
matters?
It
kind
of
depends
on
the
community,
and
you
know
what
the
population
of
people
who
are
working
in
the
IETF
stream
want,
so
I'll
be
interested
to
see
if
it's
a
project
of
interest
to
other
people.
Those.
AL
AM
AM
There
was
a
couple
of
things
in
that
email
that
caught
my
eye,
and
one
of
them
was
talk
about
how
the
current
situation
came
to
be
as
a
result
of
wanting
to
test
out
an
RLC
process,
because
there
was
some
uncertainty
around
sort
of
earlier
application
of
it
and
as
somebody
who's
does
this
for
a
living.
Managing
RFA's
has
a
large
bottom
line
vehicle.
There's
no
such
thing
as
to
test
the
north
RFP
process.
You
will
run
it
or
you
don't
and
in
the
kind
of
contracts
that
they
are.
AM
The
various
parts
of
the
organization
manages
all
none
of
them
as
far
as
I
can
see
or
for
no
square
meters,
something
the
standard
service.
It's
all
special-purpose.
It's
all.
You
know
one
offs
in
various
forms
and
shapes,
and
you
have
to
be
very
much
more
careful
when
you've
managed
and
by
those
kinds
of
services.
So
what
I'm
here
to
ask
is:
are
there
anything?
Is
there
anything
else
on
the
table?
So
you
know
that
we
should
be
worried
about
you
know.
AM
Are
we
gonna
be
here
in
Singapore
or
in
Vancouver,
looking
at
other
breakage,
because
there
are
other
people
in
the
community
who
are
affected
by
contracts,
not
peopletools
team?
Not
all
of
them
are
reimbursed
directly
or
contracted,
but
a
lot
of
them
are
affected
by
contracts
that
the
current
ITF
Edition
is
negotiating
in
various
sort
of
constellations.
I
also
will
make
sure
that
we
learn
from
this,
not
only
in
the
RFC
future
RFC
process
or
the
future
hiring
of
this
particular
function,
but
in
other
parts
of
the
organization.
So
we
don't
break
anything
else.
Thank.
H
You
for
your
comment
and
I
think
the
good
news
is
that
none
of
the
other
contracts
are
held
in
quite
this
way.
Where
there's
this
recommendation
appointment
and
then
referrals
of
the
ap2,
the
LLC
I,
think
there
are
mostly
a
good
bit
simpler
than
this,
but
I'm
sure
that
the
LSE
board
members
here
who
who
are
listening
are
listening
to
the
point
you've
made
and
we'll
try
and
avoid
making
this
error.
AM
Because
there
were
a
couple
of
Sarah
actually
had
a
couple
of
points
in
our
one
of
them.
Was
you
know
we
we're
looking
at
a
an
RFC
where
we
don't
understand.
What's
going
on,
we
need
to
test
it
and
RFP.
That's
a
Freudian
slip,
we're
looking
at
an
RFC.
We
don't
know
why
go
as
expected
last
time
we're
going
to
test
it
I
think!
That's
your
number
one
mistake
right.
The
number
two
mistake,
of
course,
is
not
communicating
properly
right
and
I'm
not
actually
directing
this
essay.
AM
H
AK
AK
Mike,
you
need
to
get
a
little
bit
closer
I've
been
trying.
Okay,
that
close
I've
been
trying
to
get
a
Mike
st.
John's
I've
been
trying
to
get
an
idea
of
the
time
line
here,
and
we've
been
working
our
way
back
through
all
this
stuff.
Could
the
IAB
members
of
the
are
sock
identifying
themselves?
Please:
okay,
cool,
so
I
went
back,
I
can
look
at
the
IRA,
see
our
sock
minions
and
there
were
only
two
discussions
on
this
particular
topic.
AK
One
of
them
was
that
because
the
I
sock
HR
person
back
in
2005,
that
said
you
may
not
evaluate
the
contractor.
You
would
come
up
with
a
you,
must
develop
you're,
going
to
evaluate
the
contract
but
someplace
in
the
middle
of
this
you
basically
went
off
and
and
and
decided
that
the
evaluation,
the
contract
was
also
to
do
a
rebid.
So
who,
in
this
process,
was
the
prime
mover
for
the
rebid
and
what
discussions
were
done
besides?
AK
H
Let
me
let
me
caution
you
about
something
related
to
the
executive
session.
In
addition,
of
course,
to
the
executive
session
there,
it's
an
executive
equivalent
mailing
list,
so
you're,
probably
not
seeing
the
full
record
because
some
of
it
may
have
been
since
it
is
a
personnel
or
a
contract
matter
on
on
this.
So
please
understand
that,
because
we
have
to
treat
these
as
confidential,
even
when
the
intent
is
to
be
laudatory
toward
the
person.
Some
of
this
is
not
in
the
public
record
and
can't
be
put
there
now
going
back
to
the
timeline
question
christian.
Z
Z
AK
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
how
much
thought
went
into
this
process
of
deciding
to
do
this
and
I'm
I'm
trying
to
make
sure
we
don't
end
up
with
a
oh.
Let's
just
do
a
the
RFP
without
you
know,
just
somebody
randomly
deciding
to
do
this
so
I
need
to
understand.
Was
there
any
discussion
of
this
and
the
impact
of
the
rebid
and
I'm
not
seeing
that
in
there
in
the
record?
So.
H
And
I
think
what
you
normally
see
in
this
case
is
the
output
and
I.
Think
I've
talked
to
you
about
this
on
here,
because
this
is
something
where
it
relates
to
a
contract
or
in
similar
cases
with
personnel
matters.
You
normally
judge
aids
by
by
output,
not
by
rehearsing
the
discussion
in
public,
and
in
this
case
the
output
was
a
recommendation
for
renewal.
Now
this.
H
In
addition
to
that
recommendation
for
renewal,
they
brought
back
up
an
issue
that
had
occurred
in
including
in
discussions
from
Heather
that
the
last
time
that
they
had
sought
candidates,
they'd
received
only
one
and
at
the
same
time,
decided
to
make
a
a
concerted
effort
over
the
following
two
years
to
figure
out
what
had
happened
and
see
if
they
could
issue
another
RP.
Now,
we've
we've
noted
in
the
previous
things
here.
That
was
certainly
a
mistake
in
communication
in
communicating
those
at
the
same
time
completely
misunderstood
as
something
that
was
reflective
of
Heather's
performance.
H
Despite
it
having
caveats
about
that
in
it,
that's
that's
mistaken.
I
think
sarah
has
been
very
clear
about
that.
It
was
also
something
where
I
think
in
response
to
leave.
We.
We
certainly
agree
that
that's
not
how
this
should
have
gone,
that
instead
we
understand
that
what
we
should
have
done
here-
and
this
is
a
fraud.
We
is
make
sure
that
everybody
was
on
board
with
that
process,
including
Heather,
before
making
the
decision
to
do
the
rienne.
H
Including
the
community
as
well,
but
at
that
point
in
the
process,
the
only
part
that
had
happened
was
the
Arisaka
recommendation
and
then
the
heiress's
resignation.
So
some
bits
of
this
that
might
have
corrected
this
and
it
would
be
kind
of
fanciful
to
assume
that
we
actually
got
this
right
didn't
happen
and
that's
where
it
went
wrong
and
did
the
IAB
at
that
time.
Reach
out
to.
H
The
information
came
to
the
IAB
I
mean
pretty
much
at
exactly
the
same
time
that
she
told
the
LLC
for
Sarah
did
reach
out
to
her
right
away.
I
sent
her
an
email
personally
but
off
list,
saying
thank
you
for
your
service
and
intended
to
reach
out
to
her
after
I
got
back
from
the
dead
or
workshop,
but
to
discuss
further,
but
because
it
was
a
you
know,
literally
in
Helsinki,
on
the
plane
getting
on
a
plane.
U
AB
U
Way,
people
are
standing
around
the
microphone
are
trying
to
debug
the
process.
Now
what
happened?
One
went
wrong.
Probably
the
people
who
can
debug
the
process
best
are
the
ones
who
executed
it.
They
should
probably
do
a
post-mortem
figure
out.
What
went
wrong,
who
made
the
mistakes
be
honest
about
it?
We
learn
from
our
mistakes.
The
next
thing
is,
and
we
undo
the
damage.
Is
it
possible?
H
AN
I'm
going
to
try
and
be
responsive
to
the
question
of
where
do
we
go
from
here?
All
right
provide
some
input
into
that
I.
Think
the
core
issue
of
of
what
we
have
to
deal
with
right
now
is
a
result
of
asking
the
RSC
to
simultaneously
deal
with
these
issues
of
strategy
and
administration,
and
it's
not
surprising
when.
E
AN
AN
Is
ready
because
that's
what
I
need
is
output
from
my
work
when
I
when
I
come
here,
so
that
creates
this
inherent
tension
and
we
should
deal
with
that
rather
than
putting
a
new
person
immediately
in
the
place
where
the
same
tension
exists
and
I
think
the
strategic
aren't
sorry
I
think
the
more
operational
parts
of
a
heart
see
have
you
know
in
many
ways
being
moved
after
the
production
centre
and
the
publisher
has
up
here
in
the
slides.
Forgive
my
hesitation
talking
here.
The
feedback
here
is
amazing.
At
this
microphone.
AN
E
AN
We
deal
with
the
harder
strategic
questions
and
then
once
you,
if
you
manage
to
separate
those
roles,
you
can
ask
the
question.
I've
heard
wildly
divergent
opinions
on
how
you
structure,
someone
that
is
only
dealing
with
strategic
questions
there
right
have.
We
now
created
a
leadership
position.
That
was
a
lot
like
the
other
leadership
positions
we
have,
and
so
there
shouldn't
be.
AN
You
know
a
hired
or
a
contracted
position.
There
should
be
an
appointed
position,
you
know,
and
then
you
have
more
appeared
kind
of
relationship
and
as
soon
as
you
create
that
other
model,
you
necessarily
bring
management
into
that.
Is
that
attention?
That's
not
survivable.
Can
you
cut
off
enough
of
that?
So
that's
leadership,
more
consistent,
the
model
we
already
do.
I'm,
not
asking
us
all
that
tonight,
but
I'm
saying
like
those
are
the
questions
I
would
like
to
see
solved
before
we
jump
into
the
new.
You
know
watching
relationship.
AN
U
So
regrettably,
I
was
standing
at
the
mic.
The
last
time
we
were
here
in
the
SoCal
talking
about
what
happened
at
the
at
the
RFC
plus
ba,
and
it's
only
getting
worse.
I
mean
this
is
me
you're
the
management
of
this
oversight,
and
this
has
been
a
giant
failure.
I,
you
know,
Oh,
all
his
presentation
was
quite
good
and
you
know
he
said
something
very
important.
He
said
the
are
sock
was
supposed
to
be
the
people
with
the
long
term
history
in
this,
so
things
didn't
change
very
quickly.
I
mean
that's.
U
That
was
the
intent
in
setting
this
up
and
when
you,
when
the
IAB
decided
to
cycle
a
whole
bunch
of
people
in
the
are
sock,
you
lost
all
of
that
and
that's
I
think
what
led
to
the
events
that
caused
us
to
lose
a
really
good
person
who
you
know
to
lose
Heather.
It
was
a
series
of
errors
that
you
know
come
back
to
a
bunch
of
things.
U
The
IB
did
so
where
I'm
going
with
this
is
I,
have
no
confidence
that
the
current
Arts
Hawk
and
the
current
IB
are
going
to
bring
us
run
the
process
to
get
us
the
next
RFC
editor
in
the
way
we
want
I
think
there's
going
to
have
to
be
some
significant
changes
in
this
to
get
the
right
set
of
people
involved
in
this.
So
we
get
a
good
outcome.
H
So
it's
different
from
the
other
IAB
structures,
or
that
the
the
people
who
stayed
in
the
ours
Hawk
hadn't
been
there
some
significant
period
of
time.
What
I
do
think
is
a
very
important
strategic
question
and
I
certainly
agree
with
you
that
we
should
deal
with
is
whether
this
is
still
the
right
structure.
It
may
very
well
be
that
having
an
arse
off
that
is
directly
appointed
by
the
NomCom
or
from
some
other
mechanism,
that's
tied
to
the
the
stream
managers
or
some
other
thing
may
be
a
better
solution
now.
H
I
think
the
most
important
thing
that
we
can
do
from
this
point,
though,
is
to
figure
out
how
we
get
to
that
strategy,
and
if
it
is
not
run
the
the
RFP
process
and
hire
somebody
to
help
us,
then
we
have
to
understand.
It
will
take
some
time
for
the
community
to
come
to
consensus
on
what
the
new
strategy
ought
to
be.
Eric.
AO
AO
AO
I
have
a
few
notes,
so
I
was
interested
to
hear
the
discussion
of
what
people's
conceptions
of
6235
ons
intention
are.
Sacra
I
went
back
and
reviewed
the
material
on
as
I
assume,
though
the
documents
actually
document
what
they're
supposed
to
document
so
I
mean
this
was
like
a
pretty
classic
oversight.
AO
Function
to
me
has
like
due
diligence
and
your
view,
candidate
selection,
all
those
things
it's
like
if
someone
gave
me
like
the
definition
oversight,
that's
what
I'd
expect
and,
and
so
it's
what
I
expect
the
IV
to
do
for
the
artsy
function
and
it's
what
I
expect
they
given.
They
choose
to
delegate
that
to
our
software.
The
community's.
E
AO
Delegate
it
to
our
sake
and
with
I,
be
overseeing
them.
That's
what
I
suspect
our
psyche
to
do
so.
I,
certainly
think
I
be
responsible,
looking
to
be
further
altima
decisions,
but
I
certainly
would
not
be
happy.
If
what
that
you
know
the
output
of
this
was
that
the
our
sock
and
the
I-beam
every
time
they
made
a
decision
have
to
like
about
the
community
or
validation
of
every
individual
decision
that
seems
non-functional
on
the
structure
we
have
in
this
community.
AO
AO
Start
in
the
beginning,
okay,
a
second
thing
I
want
to
say,
is
I
want
to
district.
Thank
you
for
you
to
say
earlier
about
the
sort
of
structures
that
we
use
for
continuity.
It's
really
not
a
viable
system
to
assume
that
continuity
has
to
reside
in
like
a
few
individuals
who
can
carry
on
forever.
It
doesn't
work
and
I
mean
we
made
this
mistake
in
the
IDF
over
and
over
again.
AO
We
like
think
that,
like
bits
of
it
exactly
right
person
in
and
like
like
the
way,
one
goes
like
a
viable
long-term
system
is
by
having
structures
not
by
having
the
great
man
or
great
woman
theory
of
history.
This
is
from
my
experience
and
the
companies
I've
worked
in
that
doesn't
really
survivable
as
people
leave.
AO
Finally,
I
think
it
is
clear
from
this
interaction
that
the
structure
and
that
sort
of
grand
strategy
of
what
the
RSC
system,
then
those
boxes
on
the
screen,
perhaps
and
may
need
some
rethink.
I
was
heartened
to
hear
Patrick
say
that
you
know
that
if
we
don't
solve
this
problem
right
away,
the
RSC's
will
continue
to
flow
and
I
grew.
That
I
mean
that's.
What
we're
here
so
on
the
RFC's
must
flow,
so
yeah
I
thought
you'd
like
that,
so
so
I
think
certainly
on
that
gives
us
some
time.
AO
It's
not
like
an
emergency.
The
so
I
think
you
know
we
have
a
broad
scale.
We
have
sort
of
two
options.
One
I
think
the
one
that
Ron
just
indicated,
which
is
take
a
pause
and
don't
appoint
anybody
new
for
a
little
while
and
sort
of
try
to
sort
out
the
community
with
the
RFC
with
the
star
shard
B,
and
the
second
is
on
you
know
to
appoint
somebody
for
a
shorter
term.
AO
Perhaps
you
can
help
us
sort
out
what
that
would
it
be
and
run
the
RC
process
is
indicated
to
see
3035
to
pick
that
person
go
with
the
expectation
that
we're
going
to
sort
things
out
rather
than
that,
like
that
they're
fitting
into
some
long-term
panel
structure,
I
think
either
those
would
be
viable
but
I
think
clearly
whatever
it
is
like
we
do.
You
know,
ask
the
question:
is
this
the
right
strategy
and
truckster
going
forward?
Thank.
D
So,
with
regards
to
RFC's
flowing
absolutely
a
priority
there,
we'll
so
yes,
I
have
a
very
tactical
role,
and
the
RSC
else
is
a
very
strategic
role.
The
tactical
role
is
an
immediate
need
that
you
need
to
consider.
We
we've
been
talking
about
the
format,
change,
there's
going
to
be
day-to-day
questions
about.
How
do
we
handle
different
things
that
will
need
to
be
answered,
ongoing
and
fairly
quickly,
we've
already
added
a
new
state
in
the
database
so
that
we
can
track.
D
You
know
as
we
track
at
a
time
we
tracked
ahrefs
the
editor
time
we
track
off
48
time
and
now
we're
going
to
track
tools,
time
where
something
is
stuck
in
a
state
where
the
tools
aren't
quite
right
that
they
need
to
change
regardless
of
the
long
term
direction
that
the
organization
takes
and
I
do
suspect.
You
need
to
spend
some
quality
time
with
that
someone
needs
to
be
able
to
help
the
RSC
production
Center
with
those
day-to-day.
What
about
this
field?
So
please
keep
that
in
mind.
So.
H
D
No
I
think
having
trying
to
find
per
telling
the
tools
team,
perhaps
to
to
take
this
part
and
run
it
I
think
trying
to
find
an
interim
person
is
going
to
be
wildly
difficult
for
anyone
you
bring
in
for
them
to
be
able
to
do
that
job.
We
run
an
XML
vocabulary.
That's
like
nothing
else
in
the
world,
so
the
I
don't
see
you
be
able
to
find
an
expertise
to
do
this
role.
D
Q
Sorry
I'd
like
to
sound
a
bit
of
a
note
of
positivity
and
thank
the
I'd
be
in
the
are
sock
for
the
oversight
they've
been.
Do
it
to
me,
oversight
is
about
back
Nia
when
you're
in
oversight
of
the
role
it's
about
backstopping,
that
role
and
paying
attention
to
find
there
might
be
question
marks
or
things
signs
that
things
might
be.
Detention
and
I.
Think
that's
what
I've
seen
out
of
the
IBNR
sock
is
fulfilling
that
role,
but
thinking
back
the
last
few
times,
I've
been
at
this
plenary.
Q
My
concluding,
perhaps
like
right
on
this
spot,
have
been
expressing
concerns
about
you
know
ways
the
RFC
seasons
to
evolve,
whether
that's
in
terms
of
SLA
violations
or
speed
of
processing
or
in
terms
of
reaching
out
stakeholder
communities.
The
consumers
of
RFC's
so
I
think
there.
There
have
been
question
marks
that
come
through
and
I
think
it's
it's
the
duty
of
the
oversight
bodies
to
be
looking
into
those
and
taking
a
look,
and
so
I
like
to
thank
the
Arisaka,
my
abhi,
for
doing
that
and
invite
them
to
continue
fulfilling
the.
Q
The
course
I
think
I'm
broadly
agree
with
the
two
alternatives
it
is.
We
have
kind
of
a
brief
Raja
Torah
and
it
takes
some
time
in
breathing
room.
You
have
a
vacancy
of
all
use
a
community
to
discuss
this,
but
I
also
think
that
I'm
slightly
more
persuaded
by
the
case
that
we
should
go
ahead
and
try
and
find
an
instruments
as
Heather
points
out.
There's
some
operational
issues
that
need
attending
to
I.
Q
Think
it
would
also
be
useful
to
have
someone
in
that
role
to
kind
of
guide
the
community
consider
discussion
and
be
kind
of
a
focus
point
for
this
conversation
as
we
discuss
the
evolution
going
forward,
so
yeah
I
think
I've
again
I'd
like
to
thank
the
IAB
in
the
arishok
and
I
think
you
know
either
of
these
two
options
he's
acceptable,
but
I
haven't
slight
preference
for
going
ahead
and
putting
a
candidate
in
the
spot.
Okay,
thanks.
AK
H
AK
He
takes
my
second
to
turn
the
volume
up,
so
I
think
there's
been
a
failure
here.
I
disagree
with
rich
first,
let
me
apologize
to
you
publicly
Ted.
If
you
felt
that
I
was
harassing
you
on
the
ITF
list,
I
got
some
feedback
that
maybe
I
wasn't
clear
with
what
I
was
trying
to
get
to
and
I
was
trying
really
hard
to
not
put
words
in
your
mouth,
but
I
did
I
was
asking
you
know,
did
the
ID
think
anything
went
wrong?
AK
Was
there
anything
that
could
have
done
differently
and
I
think
that
there
were
things
that
the
ID
did
wrong
and
could
have
done
differently,
but
first
the
response
was.
There
was
nothing
wrong.
The
idea
was
regretful.
Then
you
said
that
you
thought
the
mistake
was
that
you
hadn't
realized
that
heather
was
unhappy
this
evening
in
this
discussion
you
said:
well,
maybe
the
ID
made
a
mistake
because
they
made
the
change
to
the
our
Sauk,
Constitution
or
membership.
I
think
those
were
in
fact
mistakes
and
I
was
but
I.
AK
You
know
I,
don't
think
your
or
the
Ivy
is
arguing
and
bad
faith
about
the
sense
of
the
stewardship
role
for
the
RC
series.
I've
been
on
the
ID
and
an
ex-officio
capacity
in
the
past
and
I've
always
had
that
sense
that
the
ID
felt,
like
our
C
series,
was
part
of
the
things
that
it
was
responsible
for.
AK
However,
I,
don't
really
sense,
I
don't
see
that
the
ID
is
really
acted
like
it
was
responsible
for
the
RC
series
right,
an
interruption
in
the
RC
series
or
a
major
disruption,
the
RFC
series
you're
responsible
for
that
right,
you're
responsible
for
the
RC
series,
now
it's
being
disrupted,
it's
being
disrupted,
because
the
RSC
has
told
us
that
she
had
the
impression
that
her
customer
wasn't
happy
with
them.
She
sent
that
and
I.
Maybe
you
can
confirm
this,
but
I
believe
that
she
sent
that
to
you
before
it
went
to
the
larger
community.
AK
AK
So
let
me
I
have
two
suggestions.
Positive
suggestions
to
move
forward,
I
think
that
the
are
Sauk
members
that
were
removed
from
the
are
Sauk
should
be
added
back
in.
They
bring
expertise.
History
for
searching
for
an
RSC
they've
done
this
before
and
I
think
that
the
our
sag
and
the
ISC
be
bring
a
lot
of
continuity
and
expertise
in
the
RFC
editors,
specifically
going
back
to
when
Bob
Braden
was
our
editor
and
I
think
you
should
take
advantage
of
them,
even
if
they
aren't
on
your
picture.
Thank
you.
Z
Z
We
are
publishing
technical
specifications,
and
this
to
me
looks
like
Riley
as
a
sort
of
a
publisher
and
I
would
encourage
the
idea
to
look
into
simplifying
that
model,
because
I
think
part
of
the
problem
is
that
so
many
parties
involved
for
something
that
is
not
just
not
big
enough.
We
just
over
engineered
this
process.
Z
Y
As
said
in
635,
and
one
thing
I
want
to
say
is
like
the
data
c++
bought
I.
Think
one
of
the
learnings
is
like
you
know
if
you
need
to
come
connect
to
the
community
that
we
have
that's
like
consuming
the
stuff
and
and
a
lot
of
the
communities
here.
Ok,
like
the
IETF
is
here.
The
IRT
FS
year,
like
IAB,
is
here
obviously,
but
there's
also
like
other
people
outside
like
who
are
not
here
and
I.
Think
some
of
the
stuff
that
came
up
was,
like
you
know,
we're
not
listening
to
them.
Y
I
think
we
should
make
an
effort
to
reach
out
to
the
other
people
for
implementing
our
staff
and
using
our
staff
to
also
find
out
the
needs.
I
think
like
some
of
the
stuff
that
Heather
mentioned
right,
like
you
know,
Dana
and
I
kind
of
thing,
like
those
are
like
really
something
that
we
need
and
I
think
taking
all
these
things
into
account.
I
think
it's
like
a
really
good
idea
going
for.
AC
Jef
raskin
on
the
topic
of
leaving
the
series
editor
position
empty
for
a
period
where
we're
getting
the
new
RFC
format.
Soon
it
sounds
like
it's
still
going
to
be
being
debugged
when
we
lose
Heather
at
the
end
of
the
year
and
leaving
leaving
nobody
in
charge,
while
that
that
new
format
is
still
being
debugged,
it
makes
me
nervous
now
Heather
and
the
and
the
other
editors
know
best
how
to
deal
with
that.
But
I
wanted
to
raise
that
as
I
worry.
U
U
I
want
to
figure
out
what
it
was
and
I
went
back,
trying
to
read
all
of
ITF
at
ITF
lists,
and
that
made
me
realize
that
we
actually
had
a
much
larger
problem
in
this
reading
that
list,
and
there
was
a
reason-
I
didn't
read
it,
but
after
I
work
on
for
a
while,
I
think
that
when
we've
heard
this
from
multiple
people,
what
we
do
going
forward
is
this
by
far
more
important
here
and
I
I
worry.
Sometimes
we
have
a
very
frustrating
experience
and
then
we
make
reaction.
Adjustments
to
it.
U
You
know
I
caution
us
to
proceed
in
a
rational
way
that
thinks
about
this
stuff
and
sets
up
something
that
was
in
a
reaction
to
a
mistake
or
something
that
happened,
but
instead
is
a
better
way
of
doing.
This.
I
heard
suggestions
like
that,
the
three-year
rotating
term
to
keep
continuity
and
those
types
of
things,
and
that
type
sounds
like
a
very
logical
type
of
thing.
U
I
also
think
that
we
should
think
that
it's
very
normal
for
any
one
of
our
groups,
that
is,
is
responsible
for
contracts
that
are
one
of
our
most
expensive
budget
items
in
this
organization
of
producing
rfcs
that
that
we
would,
even
if
we
thought
that
the
contractor
doing
was
doing
a
wonderful
job,
but
we
still
would
ask
about
other
prices
for
it.
Periodically
that
had
been
normal
oversight.
I
would
expect
from
any
business
group
spending
a
large
chunk
of
money
which
you'd
occasionally
check.
You
know
check
that
it
was
you're
getting
the
right
thing.
U
The
best
things
you
could
so
I
think
that
that's
that's
pretty
normal
I
had
a
very
hard
time,
seeing
a
a
very
specific
problem
with
the
process
with
the
the
structure
it
seems
like
our
structure
is
in
many
ways
similar
to
any
other
structure
we
did
invent,
but
I
do
think
we
have
to
give
more
guidance
on
what
we
want
out
of
it
and
sort
of
think
of
step
back
as
community
think
about
what
are
the
things
we
can
do
to
improve
that
and
then
and
then
make
those
happen
over
time.
Thanks.
H
Okay,
Henrik
you're
next
I
think
the
my
clients
have
not
drained
I'm,
not
going
to
try
and
cut
anybody
off,
but
at
some
point
we
may
need
to
move
everybody
to
the
front
of
the
room
so
that
they
can
start
resetting
the
back.
So
if
folks,
who
are
in
the
back,
if
you
consider
moving
France
to
allow
them
to
do
that,
that'd
be
good
Henrik
you!
You
can
start
the
thing
by
by
coming
to
the
phone
Thanks.
AI
So,
yes,
I
think
something
went
wrong.
I
think
we
need
to
look
again
at
the
setup
of
the
hora
sock
and
the
process,
but
I
have
one
particular
question
for
Ted.
I
may
be
wrong,
but
I
seem
to
recall
that
on
the
RFC,
those
plus
both
the
Thun
Thun,
you
may
be
members
and
also
were
quite
vocal
in
proposing
quite
dramatic
changes.
AI
H
I
I
think
that
we
we
sent
a
message
a
year
ago,
pretty
much
exactly
about
the
output
of
the
art
C++,
both
and
acknowledge
that
there
were
not
just
one
but
I
think
I
count:
seven
mistakes
in
it,
among
them
some
of
the
early
consultation
issues,
and
it's
clear
that
there
was
an
eighth
mistake,
and
that
was
at
the
at
the
end
of
that.
We
were
very
clear
that
the
community
wanted
Heather
to
take
the
lead
in
the
further
evolution
discussions
and
not
us,
and
you
know
we-
we
thought
that
that
was
done.
H
Apparently
it
had
continued
to
be
a
source
of
frustration
for
her
enough
that,
when
a
later
of
frustration
is
this
last
straw
on
the
camel's
back,
it
was
one
of
the
things
she
cited
in
her
message
to
the
community
as
one
of
the
issues
that
that
had
caused
her
to
decide
it
was
better
for
her
to
go
away
and
that
we
were
no
longer
aligned.
We
didn't
think
that
it
was
any
more
a
question
of
alignment.
AI
AI
N
Okay,
thanks
Leslie
Daigle,
so
I
have
a
question
for
you:
either
you
can
or
you
representing
the
idea.
Whatever
then
I
want
to
give
my
answer
and
then
answer
your
question
about
filling
the
slot.
So
the
question
is
on
a
continuum
from
the
RFC
plus
bofto.
Now
I
think
we
can
agree.
We've
encountered
some
uncomfortable
situations
with
the
RFC
editor
and
the
artisan
series.
What
do
you
think's
good
looks
like.
N
H
So
I
don't
think
we
can
get
back
to
the
status
quo
ante,
given
what's
happened
so
far.
So
I
think
what
good
looks
like
starts
by
having
the
community
come
to
an
agreement
about
whether
they
wants
to
bring
in
an
aura
C
to
help
the
future
discussion
now
or
as
close
to
now,
as
we
can
make
it
and
with
the
acknowledgement
that
John
had
brought
up
earlier
of
needing
to
stretch
beyond
the
increasingly
small
number
of
people.
H
That's
in
this
room
and
after
that
to
finish
the
community
discussion
of
what
changes
need
to
happen
here
and
I.
Think,
given
some
of
the
issues
that
Bob
Hindon
raised,
those
changes
might
in
fact
mean
that
it's
no
longer
the
IAB
which
appoints
the
are
sock
at
all.
But
its
role
changes
quite
significantly
as
a
result
of
this
I
actually
think
that
the
right
thing
to
happen
is
to
make
sure
that
the
community
believes
and
has
the
structures
in
play
to
make
sure
that
the
function
goes
forward
in
the
future.
H
N
Thank
you
because
I
think
that
was
definitely
responsive
to
my
question
and
my
answer
to
the
question
aligns
with
much
of
it.
If
not
all
my
answer
is
that
a
year
from
now,
I
would
like
the
IETF
and
the
internet
technical
community
as
a
whole,
which
are
impacted
by
this
situation,
to
have
confidence
that
we
are
all
on
the
same
page
about
what
the
RSC
is,
what
the
RFC
series
is
and
that
the
people
who
are
making
the
decisions
not
only
agree
with
what
that
is,
but
are
also
empowered
to
make
it
happen.
N
AP
H
Q
Q
The
way
I
would
look
at
the
RFC
series.
Editor
position
would
be
potentially
more
akin
to
like
a
C,
Series
speech,
type
role
and
the
our
Sauk
role,
I,
would
say
better
would
align
with
like
a
board
of
directors
and
the
board
of
directors
for
a
corporation
has
the
best
value
when
it
has
a
lot
of
stability
and
I.
Don't
know,
I,
don't
know
what
the
rules
are.
Q
How
the
constituency
of
the
are
sock
is
maintained,
where
they're
drawn
from
etc,
etc,
but
I
think
having
a
better
dialogue
with
the
RFC
series,
editor
on
the
constituency
and
the
long-term
direction
and
having
much
less
change
occur
and
having
it
be,
not
duration,
driven
but
more
responsibility
or
vision,
driven
like
it
would
be
in
any
kind
of
bigger
board
type
thing.
There's
no
reason
not
to
that.
I
can
see,
and
I
would
say
that,
along
with
that,
as
much
as
the
RFC
series,
editor
is
a
paid
role.
Q
I,
do
not
think
it
should
be
viewed
the
same
as
a
contractor.
It
should
be
viewed
as
a
limp,
semi
limited
role,
with
the
expectation
of
as
long
as
it's
being
done.
Well,
though,
it's
up
to
the
decision
of
the
are
sock
to
replace
or
not,
but
it
shouldn't
be
driven
by
particular
scheduling
or
duration
of
contracts.
I
think
restructuring
it
along.
Those
lines
may
have
a
better
result
in
terms
of
the
people,
you'll
attract
and
possibly
even
who
you
can
retain
so.
AD
Sure
very
quickly,
I
think
that
we've
had
some
discussion
on
the
asset
to
list
and
during
the
discussion,
I
expressed
opposition
to
the
idea
of
the
earth.
Rc
has
an
employee
various
reasons
that
are
on
that
list,
so
I
think
there's
the
rest
of
your
comments.
I
tell
you
agreement,
but
that
part
no.
For
me.
H
Medic
comment:
slash
concern,
I,
think,
I,
see
a
there's
kind
of
watching
some
of
this
dialogue
and
watching
some
of
the
conversations
in
the
ITF
list.
Looking
at
it
as
a
observer,
I
see
something
I.
Think
echo
alluded
to
this
in
one
of
his
comments
of
the
community
trying
to
do
on
an
incident
review
by
plenary
or
micromanaging
people.
We
put
it
in
a
leadership
role
by
plenary
or
trying
to
design
by
plenary,
and
it's
unclear
how
constructive
that
is.
H
If
they
make
a
mistake
and
then
say
sorry,
we
made
a
mistake
and
start
trying
to
in
good
faith,
look
at
what
they
did
to
make.
That
kind
of
made
that
mistake
and
try
to
figure
out
how
do
they
improve
that
going
forwards
if
people
feel
like
even
that
they
do
that
the
entire
community
is
going
to
be
constantly
second-guessing
them.
It's
gonna
be
hard
to
get.
People
are
gonna,
be
interested
in
going
into
leadership
roles
dying
for
words,
so
just
to
quickly
respond
to
that.
H
Well,
I
certainly
hope
that
everybody
believes
we're
acting
in
good
faith
being
in
front
of
the
plenary
and
answering
questions.
The
community
and
listening
community
is
one
of
the
primary
accountability
mechanisms
that
has
been
built
into
the
IHF
and
I.
Think
that
probably
the
worst
possible
result
of
all
of
this
would
be
losing
it
so
I
think
as
much
as
this
is
a
difficult
way
of
getting
things
done,
we
need
to
listen
and
we
need
to
listen
in
public.
G
Hi
I'm
Adrian
Farrell
I'm,
the
independent
submissions
editor
some
quick
thanks,
thank
to
you
and
staying
up
there
facilitating
this
and
risking
your
blood
sugar
levels
thanks
to
Ola
for
what
turns
out
it
really
helped
for
slide
set
along
the
way.
I
will
have
mentioned
the
four
screens
that
feed
the
RSC
series
and
I
think
Ted.
You
introduced
a
term
that
hadn't
come
up
from
our
life,
which
was
the
stream
managers.
So
that's
the
people
responsible
in
some
inverted
commas,
for
the
streams
I
wondered
along
the
way.
G
H
I
think
that
this
is
one
of
the
structural
changes
we
may
have
to
make
that
the
way
that
the
system
is
currently
set
up,
the
rock
and
the
stream
managers
don't
actually
have
a
good
interface
other
than
just
talking
to
each
other
and
that
it
may
be
necessary
to
institute
a
much
more
structural
relationship.
If,
if
that's
what
we
want
to
see,
yes,.
G
AR
AQ
AS
Is
that
negotiated,
oh
yeah?
That
was,
but
the
point
he's
made
is
something
that
I
would
also
like
to
touch
on.
In
Heather's
note
and
in
the
discussion
here.
It's
clear
that
there
was
not
enough
open
communication
and
checking
in
on
her
and
on
the
concerns
that
had
been
raised
and
I
would
like
to
know
what
your
plans
are
for,
checking
in
on
all
of
the
other,
incredibly
critical
contractors
and
volunteers
and
making
sure
that
they
are
not
in
similar
states.
H
So
that's
a
really
good
question.
We
do
have
some
methods
of
working
with
am
most
folks
in
less
than
formal
structures
and
I
think
those
are
avenues
where
we
could
might
potentially
learn
of
that.
But
it's
probably
something
that
we
need
to
work
with
the
LLC
board
on,
since
the
IAB
actually
doesn't
have
formal
relationships
with
many
of
those
other
contractors.
But
thanks
for
raising
the
issue
not.
AS
H
P
I've
also
been
here
before
this
will
be
very
brief,
but
I've
heard
it
something
a
couple
of
times
tonight
a
couple
of
times
of
the
list
which
needs
clarification
if
I
decide
to
go
down
to
the
local
hardware,
store
and
buy
a
kilogram
of
Tenpenny
Canadian
standard
nails
because
they
are
Canadian
standard.
There
is
a
Canadian
standard
for
Tenpenny
nails
at
a
Canadian
standard.
Four
kilogram
I
know
what
I'm
getting
and
if
I
decide
to
go
to
the
next
hardware
store
and
do
price
comparisons.
I
can
do
that
in
a
reliable
way.
P
If
we
start
talking
about
bidding
these
contracts
on
a
competitive
price
basis,
we
are
in
deep
deep
trouble
because
we
are
insulting
the
people
whom
we
would
most
want
to
do
the
jobs
and
we
are
going
to
get
ourselves
exactly
what
we
deserve.
So,
let's
be
very,
very
careful
about
a
vocabulary
which
starts
talking
about.
We
competing
these
things
periodically
to
get
a
better
price.
P
H
Q
N
Q
H
Over
it
we're
listening
at
this
point,
he
stated
his
opinion.
We
can
move
on
Henrick
I
think
we
have
to
go
ahead
and
say
we're
done
taking
new
people
in
because
we're
now
seriously
over
time
like
over
our
over
time,
so
I'm
gonna
drain
the
queue
on
this
side,
since
it
was
already
occupied,
iliyan
Thank.
T
You
Ted
Thank
You
ivy
for
staying
late
and
I'd
like
to
also
thank
colleagues
here,
I
think
generally,
that
we've
had
a
pretty
positive
discussion
here
and
I
think
we
should
all
recognize
that
I
understand.
I
can
see
that
there's
still
a
lot
of
passion
that
people
have,
and
there
are
ideas
that
they
haven't
had
the
opportunity
to
express
one
of
the
things.
I
think
the
most
important
question
I
have
is:
where
do
we
go
from
here?
In
terms
of
how
do
you
want
to
structure
the
conversation
going
forward?
Ted,
okay,.
AO
Incredibly,
quick,
two
points.
Yes,
generally
in
our
technical
designs,
we
try
to
avoid
single
points
of
failure.
I
would
encourage
people
to
think
about
that
as
we
go
forward
in
terms
of
structure.
Second,
the
primary
purpose
is
Hana
said
of
this
organization
is
to
publish
technical
specifications
and
whatever
structure
we
choose
has
to
serve
that.
Ultimately,
thank
you.
Thank
you.
H
And
let
me
add
at
the
final
moment
to
thank
you
to
all
of
you
who
came
to
this
part
of
the
plenary
and
gave
your
thoughts
to
each
other
and
the
IAB
and
the
I
saw
on
this
set
of
points.
I
realize
it's
been
a
very
emotional
couple
of
weeks
for
many
and
I
also
appreciate
the
collegial
and
professional
manner
you
all
participated
in.
Thank
you
very
much.