Benjamin Kaduk
2018-03-01 16:20:36 UTC
Hi all,
The NomComm has selected me as the next Security AD, so I will need
to step down as kitten chair by the London meeting.
I do not want to ask Matt to take on the entire WG-chairing burden
himself, though he is willing to help train/mentor a new chair if
needed. If we do not have sufficient staffing in the chair role,
it seems likely that we will need to close the WG. Closing the WG
does not mean that work on Kerberos, SASL, and its other chartered
topics cannot happen anymore -- rather, it just means that such work
would need to happen in a different route, perhaps making use of the
new secdispatch WG for advice on how to do so. Direct AD
sponsorship of drafts is also a possibility that I'd be willing to
pursue.
As a brief overview, the WG chair is tasked with running WG sessions
at physical IETF meetings (if any occur), judging WG consensus,
including soliciting additional reviews if needed to judge
consensus, and shepherding documents through their
lifecycle/approval process (both through the formal "document
shepherd" role and otherwise). There are documentation and
checklists available to help with the process side of things, and it
is not necessary to have deep technical expertise on the subject
matter in order to perform the role. (Some familiarity or
willingness to obtain familiarity with the technical topics is
needed, in order to be able to judge consensus and determine the
seriousness of any potential issues that may arise during discussion
of documents and their impact on WG consensus.) Since kitten has
not regularly been scheduling sessions at physical IETF meetings, it
is likely that a travel budget is not needed, though it is still
recommended to talk to your management about the additional
involvement and time commitment.
Please let me know if you think you might be interested in the WG
chair role for kitten -- I'm happy to have a conversation about the
details of the role and how it might interact with your situation.
Thanks,
Ben
The NomComm has selected me as the next Security AD, so I will need
to step down as kitten chair by the London meeting.
I do not want to ask Matt to take on the entire WG-chairing burden
himself, though he is willing to help train/mentor a new chair if
needed. If we do not have sufficient staffing in the chair role,
it seems likely that we will need to close the WG. Closing the WG
does not mean that work on Kerberos, SASL, and its other chartered
topics cannot happen anymore -- rather, it just means that such work
would need to happen in a different route, perhaps making use of the
new secdispatch WG for advice on how to do so. Direct AD
sponsorship of drafts is also a possibility that I'd be willing to
pursue.
As a brief overview, the WG chair is tasked with running WG sessions
at physical IETF meetings (if any occur), judging WG consensus,
including soliciting additional reviews if needed to judge
consensus, and shepherding documents through their
lifecycle/approval process (both through the formal "document
shepherd" role and otherwise). There are documentation and
checklists available to help with the process side of things, and it
is not necessary to have deep technical expertise on the subject
matter in order to perform the role. (Some familiarity or
willingness to obtain familiarity with the technical topics is
needed, in order to be able to judge consensus and determine the
seriousness of any potential issues that may arise during discussion
of documents and their impact on WG consensus.) Since kitten has
not regularly been scheduling sessions at physical IETF meetings, it
is likely that a travel budget is not needed, though it is still
recommended to talk to your management about the additional
involvement and time commitment.
Please let me know if you think you might be interested in the WG
chair role for kitten -- I'm happy to have a conversation about the
details of the role and how it might interact with your situation.
Thanks,
Ben