Geographically-Focused IETF Activities
draft-atlas-geo-focused-activities-00
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Expired".
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Alia Atlas , Christian O'Flaherty , हरीश चौधरी | ||
| Last updated | 2017-07-04 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-atlas-geo-focused-activities-00
Network Working Group A. Atlas
Internet-Draft Juniper Networks
Intended status: Best Current Practice C. O'Flaherty
Expires: January 4, 2018 ISOC
H. Chowdhary
NIXI
July 03, 2017
Geographically-Focused IETF Activities
draft-atlas-geo-focused-activities-00
Abstract
The document defines how Geographically-Focused IETF Activities are
organized and how IETF policies apply. It is intended for eventual
publication as a BCP but this is currently an initial strawman
proposal based upon the existing variety of experience with the
experimental activities in this space over the past several years.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 4, 2018.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
Atlas, et al. Expires January 4, 2018 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft I-D July 2017
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Organization of Geographically-Focused IETF Activities . . . 5
3.1. IETF Local Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2. Repeating Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.3. One-Time Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.4. Appointment, Term of Service, and Transitions for
Coordinators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.5. Support for Coordinators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. IETF Policies Applied to Geographically-Focused IETF
Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1. Keeping Attendance Records (Bluesheets) . . . . . . . . . 7
4.2. Note Well . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.3. Open and Professional . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.4. Localization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.5. Use of IETF Name and Logo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.5.1. Not Official IETF Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5. Use of IETF Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. Social Media and Communications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7. Feedback Loop: Metrics and Surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
10. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1. Introduction
The IETF primarily focuses our activities on plenary meetings,
mailing lists, and individual Working Group interim meetings with
Internet Drafts, RFCs, and some structured text or code as
deliverables. There has been and continues to be interest in having
activities focused in different geographical areas. There is a wide
variety of such activities that are supported by different
motivations and objectives. The following list is illustrative - not
restrictive.
1. IETF Days supported by the Internet Society
2. View-only of a Working Group Session with IETF introduction
3. RFCs We Love technical talks meeting
Atlas, et al. Expires January 4, 2018 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft I-D July 2017
4. Open physical meetings with technical talks on topics of IETF
interest
5. Remote Participation Hubs
6. Hackathons to build IETF awareness and encourage developers
towards practical implementations of IETF standards
7. Panels, seminars and tutorials at academic events, NOG meetings,
IXP meetings etc.
8. Open social informal meet-ups (over lunch, dinner, etc.)
Some of the motivations and objectives include: 1. increasing
awareness of the IETF's role in the Internet ecosystem, 2. providing
feedback and exposure to potential new IETF work and providing
mentoring and support to help authors bring that work into the IETF,
3. outreach to encourage new potential IETF participants, 4.
Increasing IETF diversity 5. increase cross-area learning, 6.
strengthen professional and social connections between IETFers, 7.
provide feedback and discussion on early work & mentoring to newer
IETFers, 8. reduce financial barriers to low-volume new participants
and show advantages from face-to-face interactions.
These objectives can be summed up as increasing awareness of the
IETF, doing outreach to encourage new IETF participation, and
increase technical discussions and cross-learning to encourage faster
and better technical output. These are objectives that are in the
best interest of the IETF.
The IETF works well when organization happens from motivated people
who self-organize and the IETF can provide support and light
oversight. The IETF has an Education, Mentoring, and Outreach
Directorate that serves at the pleasure of the IETF Chair and
oversight of outreach-related activities are part of that
Directorate's charter.
The IETF has a variety of policies and processes that are focused on
preserving an open and transparent standards process with clarity
around IPR impacts. The IETF Trust holds trademarks that are used by
the IETF for our activities; it is important that these are used
appropriately and with permission.
This document defines how the various processes and policies apply to
geographically-focused activities. This document also defines the
light oversight for how such activities are run.
Atlas, et al. Expires January 4, 2018 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft I-D July 2017
2. Terminology
Geographically-Focused IETF Activities An IETF Activity that is
centered in a specific geographic area. Examples include IETF
Local Communities, Remote Awareness Hubs, IETF Awareness Events,
and Remote Participation Hubs. Necessary attributes are being
geographically-focused and open for participation.
IETF Local Community: A persistent geographically-focused local
group of those participating in the IETF and
interested in the IETF. An IETF Local Community may do a variety
of different activities, include Remote Participation Hubs. The
necessary attributes are persistence and technical discussion
related to the IETF. The focus is on growing a local group of
people participating in the IETF and strengthening the
professional and social relationships between them to encourage
collaboration.
Remote Awareness Hub An event where video from one or more IETF
Working Group or Plenary sessions are shown.
The event may happen at the same time as the session or may be
time-shifted and use a recording. There may be additional
introductory presentations or other activities. Necessary
attributes are focus on an event and viewing of an IETF WG or
Plenary session. The focus is on holding an event to raise
awareness of what happens at an IETF meeting.
IETF Awareness Activity An activity where "what the IETF is and
does" is presented to raise awareness of the IETF. Materials
might include presentations about IETF technical work or other
technical work that might be related to IETF work. Necessary
attributes are focus on an activity and on discussing the IETF.
Remote Participation Hub An activity that is connected to an IETF
Working Group or Plenary session such that interactive
participation in the session is possible. Necessary attributes
are focus on an activity and the potential for interactive
participation in the primary session.
General Coordinators The individuals responsible for coordinating
and running a Geographically-Focused IETF Activity. These are
appointed by the Education, Mentoring, and Oversight Directorate.
Local Coordinator For some awareness activities which are a single
activity, those interested in organizing it may serve as the Local
Coordinators while a general Coordinator, who helps with such
events, may provide the IETF experience and support.
Atlas, et al. Expires January 4, 2018 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft I-D July 2017
Repeating Activity An activity may be sufficiently successful in a
particular geography so that there is interest in having it
repeat. This might be Remote Participation Hubs, Remote Awareness
Hubs, or other activities. When there is a desire and expectation
for a series of repeating activities, then it is useful to have
Local Coordinators and manage the series similarly to an IETF
Local Community.
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119, BCP 14
[RFC2119].
3. Organization of Geographically-Focused IETF Activities
These activities can be focused on a single activity, repeating
activities or creating an IETF Local Community. It's desirable to
have at least 2 Coordinators for a Geographically-Focused IETF
Activity accepted by the Directorate. In this section, the oversight
role is given to the Directorate because the Directorate's
organization is not defined here. It is expected that oversight MAY
be delegated to the Directorate member in charge of Outreach
Programs; the Directorate MUST be notified of such and MAY choose to
override the decision. If the situation is still not resolved, then
the IETF Chair will make the final decision.
3.1. IETF Local Communities
An IETF Local Community is expected to be a persistent group with
periodic activities. Each IETF Local Community MUST have at least 1
Coordinator accepted by the Directorate. It is recommended to
identify at least 2 Coordinators; more than 5 is not desirable. The
Local Community Coordinators will work together to define the
activities and schedule and do the organization to make the
activities happen. If it is not possible for a Coordinator to attend
a particular meeting, the Coordinator can appoint a proxy to run the
meeting and follow the necessary policies (attendance, note-well,
etc).
3.2. Repeating Activities
If successful, it is likely that some one-time activities, such as a
Remote Participation Hub, may become repeating. Such a stream of
activities in a fixed geography SHOULD have at least 1 Coordinator
reporting to the Directorate. This will allow the Coordinator to
participate in the support provided by the Directorate and other
Coordinators.
Atlas, et al. Expires January 4, 2018 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft I-D July 2017
3.3. One-Time Activities
Some Geographically-Focused IETF Activities may be one-time activity.
There still needs to be oversight and support for such activities.
The Directorate MUST identify at least 1 Coordinator to oversee and
provide support for such one-time activities. A Geographically-
Focused IETF Activity in a particular geography that do not have a
Coordinator identified fall under the One-Time Activity Coordinators,
even if that activity has or is repeating. There may be a period
where it isn't clear that specific Coordinators for the activity
should be appointed; for instance, it may not be obvious for a year
or more that the activity will continue to repeat.
The One-Time Activity Coordinators MUST appoint a Local Coordinator
for any activity that the none of the One-Time Activity Coordinators
will be attending and running.
3.4. Appointment, Term of Service, and Transitions for Coordinators
In general, a Coordinator should be familiar with the IETF and
preferably be or have been an active participant. For a new Local
Community or a Repeating Activity, it is likely that there are good
candidates for Coordinators. If not, that may be a sign that the
health of the activity is in question and more support is needed
before appointing Coordinators.
It is not appropriate to assume that a Coordinator will serve for an
indefinite amount of time. The Directorate should check in with both
the Coordinators and with the associated mailing lists or activities
to see how the activity is going and if the Coordinators are
interested in continuing to do a good job. The Directorate - and in
particular the individual in charge of Outreach Programs within the
directorate, should serve to hear about any concerns and issues
around the Coordinator's performance. The Coordinators serve at the
pleasure of the Directorate. Changes are primarily made by the
Directorate member in charge of Outreach Programs - but the
Directorate MUST be informed. If there are concerns, then the
Directorate can override the decision. If the situation is still not
resolved, it will go to the IETF Chair for resolution.
To ensure smooth transitions between Coordinators, the Directorate
member in charge of Outreach Programs must have the ability to change
ownership and administration of resources used by the Geographically-
Focused IETF Activity. In the case where such resources are the
Coordinator's personal resources or their organization's resource
(e.g. a MeetUp, a company resource, etc.), discussion and
documentation (e.g. in the wiki) of a transition strategy before the
resource begins being used is necessary.
Atlas, et al. Expires January 4, 2018 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft I-D July 2017
3.5. Support for Coordinators
The Directorate SHOULD provide support for Coordinators. This should
include the ability for Coordinators to learn from each others'
experiences. Different geographies may find different ideas and
structures work better. There MUST be a way to bring up up common
administrative issues and concerns so that the Directorate can
facilitate resolving them.
4. IETF Policies Applied to Geographically-Focused IETF Activities
This document uses definitions from [RFC8179] because IPR
considerations drive some of the policy, such as whether it is
appropriate to show a Note-Well reminder and whether it is necessary
to track who was present at an activity.
According to [RFC8179], "IETF": In the context of this document,
the IETF includes all individuals who participate in meetings,
working groups, mailing lists, functions, and other activities
that are organized or initiated by ISOC, the IESG, or the IAB
under the general designation of the Internet Engineering Task
Force, or IETF, but solely to the extent of such participation.
Some Geographically-Focused IETF Activities may be initiated by ISOC
and others organized by the Education, Mentoring, and Outreach
Directorate, as initiated by the IETF Chair. Experiments with such
activities over the last couple years have been organized by ISOC,
members of the IESG, and folks active in the Directorate. Therefore,
these Geographically-Focused IETF Activities are part of the IETF and
it is necessary to define how various IETF policies apply.
The key question for how IETF policies apply to a geographically-
focused activity is whether that activity should be considered
"Participating in an IETF discussion or activity", as defined in
[RFC8179].
4.1. Keeping Attendance Records (Bluesheets)
In the IETF, there are three motivations for keeping track of whom
attends a session. First, there are logistics and tracking the
health of the associated group; for instance, what size meeting room
is physically required? Second, there is documenting whom is
influencing the standards process by participating in the session.
Third, there is documenting whom is in the room for legal issues
around intellectual property; the IETF does receive sufficient
requests for copies of bluesheets that they are available on-line.
Atlas, et al. Expires January 4, 2018 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft I-D July 2017
For all Geographically-Focused IETF Activities, the Coordinators
SHOULD keep track of attendance. Logistically, this supports
planning for future similar events. It can provide a method for
continued communication. It provides some quantitative input to
develop an understanding of how successful towards an activity's
objectives an activity was. For activities that are anticipated to
influence the standards process, it is important to track who has
attended. For Remote Participation Hubs, the Coordinators MUST have
participants use the current remote participation tools available.
For other such activities, the Coordinates SHOULD track the
attendance.
At a minimum, attendance records MUST include name and affiliation.
Unless participants simply use the current remote participation
tools, a readable digital image of these SHOULD be provided to the
Secretariat via the defined process. Attendance records MAY also
include additional information, but information such as an email
address SHOULD not be provided as part of a readable digital image.
Such additional information MAY be used by the Coordinators and
Directorate for metrics and, with agreement, future contact.
4.2. Note Well
At IETF Sessions, a Note Well is shown to remind attendees of their
obligations under the IETF's IPR policy. Showing the Note Well does
not change or create the obligations; it is merely a helpful
reminder. In Geographically-Focused IETF Activities, there are
likely to be folks new to the IETF for whom not merely showing the
Note Well, but having some discussion around its purpose can be
useful. With [RFC8179], the IPR-related obligations apply not merely
to IETF sessions but to a variety of discussions intending to
influence the standards process.
For events that are anticipated to influence the standards process,
such as Remote Participation Hubs and some IETF Local Community
events, the Coordinators MUST ensure that the IETF's Note Well is
shown; for Remote Participation Hubs, this may simply be as part of
viewing the WG or Plenary session. Coordinators SHOULD show the
IETF's Note Well at formal (i.e. where it is possible to project
presentations) events and discuss briefly what it means. This is
useful for events targeting IETF awareness because understanding how
the IETF handles IPR provides useful information for potential
participants and their affiliations.
Atlas, et al. Expires January 4, 2018 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft I-D July 2017
4.3. Open and Professional
Just as the IETF Plenary meetings and Working Group interims are open
to all who wish to participate, it is necessary that Geographically-
Focused IETF Activities are also open to all participants.
Participants must behave according to professional standards.
[RFC7154] is a BCP defining guidelines for conduct in the IETF; it
applies to Geographically-Focused IETF Activities as well. [RFC7776]
defines Anti-Harassment procedures and creates an Ombudsteam to
handle issues.
4.4. Localization
Since Geographically-Focused IETF Activities specifically happen in
widely varying localities, there can be language and other location-
specific considerations. While the IETF works only in English, there
may be some types of events where using the local language is
preferable. There may be other localization accommodations that are
appropriate to consider. A localization accommodation MUST NOT
compromise the openness of the event for attendees.
4.5. Use of IETF Name and Logo
Geographically-Focused IETF Activities may use the IETF logo and IETF
name, with suitable oversight. For IETF Local Communities, there are
Coordinators appointed who will be informed about the IETF Trust
policies and basic acceptance. For other Geographically-Focused IETF
Activities, there will also be either specific Coordinators for the
activity, in the case of repeating events, or Coordinators who
provide oversight to help individual events happen with local
coordinators. In general, not using a misleading name and not
modifying the IETF logo or name is sufficient. For unusual cases,
these will be discussed on the Coordinators' mailing list and
remaining questions will be addressed to the IAD.
4.5.1. Not Official IETF Activities
Even though the IETF supports and encourages the organization of
activities aimed to increase participation, when they're not official
IETF activities, careful care of IETF name and logo usage should be
taken. In order to obtain permission to use or display any IETF logo
or name, you must first complete and send, to iad@ietf.org, the form:
http://trustee.ietf.org/docs/IETF_General_TM_License.pdf Please
include a description of your activity, contact information,
referrals inside the IETF community and any other information that
can be used for approval. As as general guideline, as long as you're
not using a misleading name for your activity (avoid using names that
can be confused with official IETF activities) and you haven't
Atlas, et al. Expires January 4, 2018 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft I-D July 2017
modified any IETF Trust logo or name, you will receive a positive
response.
IETF logo files can be found in the IETF site (https://ietf.org/
logo/)
5. Use of IETF Resources
The IETF can provide resources such as mailing lists, wikis,
calendars. When a new resource is needed, the Outreach Programs
Directorate member is responsible for forwarding on an appropriate
request. Area Directors can approve new mailing lists; requests for
new mailing lists will go to the IETF Chair or appointed delegate for
initial approval.
The following is a proposed structure for IETF mailing-lists to be
used by the Geographically-Focused IETF Activities.
1. outreach-coordinators mailing list: This list has at least the
Coordinators appointed by Directorate, but has open membership
and archive.
2. ietf-hub-[geography]: For Repeating Events and IETF Local
Communities, there is an associated mailing list. Another
possible name is ietf-local-[geography]; currently there are
ietf-hub-boston and ietf-hub-bangalore.
3. vmeet: for discussion of Geographically-Focused IETF Activities
as well as virtual meetings, since that is where the conversation
has been happening.
4. Ietf-community-[large-geography]: To coordinate across the Local
Communities and for other Geographically-Focused IETF Activities.
A current example is ietf-community-india.
5. outreach-discuss: For discussion of outreach activities around
the IETF Community.
It is useful to have a wiki that allows a persistent URI for sharing
events, storing information about past events, and brainstorming/
organizing new ones. With the proposed structure where all of the
Geographically-Focused IETF Activities are related to Outreach, a
wiki for outreach, that can then be self-organized, is needed. This
can currently be under https://trac.ietf.org/trac/edu/outreach;
appropriate links and visibility will be needed and need to be
periodically reevaluated.
Atlas, et al. Expires January 4, 2018 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft I-D July 2017
A shared on-line calendar that at least Coordinators can add events
to is needed. This will provide a single place to check when and
where various activities are happening. Given that many IETFers
travel for business, it also makes it easy for IETFers to discover if
there is a local activity happening that is of interest.
6. Social Media and Communications
Most of IETF communications activities are coordinated and
accomplished by ISOC staff. For Social media, industry media and
other communication needs the Coordinator should contact
comms@ietf.org for an appropriate messaging. Through ISOC's support,
the activity will be better promoted and aligned with IETF
expectations. There is an ongoing revision of IASA activities that
can affect how future IETF communications are managed.
Once the basic requirements and a template for the communication are
understood by Coordinators, it is expected that only unusual
communications will need discussion. Sharing of the information is
still desirable so that events can be better promoted. Coordinators
will need to work on promoting the activities and reaching out to the
relevant communities.
7. Feedback Loop: Metrics and Surveys
The breadth of objectives and activities covered by Geographically-
focused IETF activities makes it very hard to have a single set of
metrics or appropriate surveys. Having geographically-focused IETF
activities is an experiment. It is useful to know how the various
activities are doing and what changes or tuning might be desirable.
There is useful information to collect from Coordinators and from
attendees.
Here is a list of possible questions for Coordinators.
1. What types of events are you holding? How frequently? What is
the attendance?
2. What types of communication & outreach are you using? What seems
effective?
3. What WGs and Areas are of interest?
4. How could the IETF make holding events easier?
5. What kinds of events are you interested in holding in the future?
6. Would mentors or remote speakers be helpful?
Atlas, et al. Expires January 4, 2018 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft I-D July 2017
7. What objectives do you have for your events?
8. What is the mixture of folks attending in terms of IETF
experience, affiliation, technical interests, and active
participation?
9. What advice would you give other Coordinators?
Here is a list of possible questions for attendees. Some may be
primarily useful in IETF awareness and others primarily in IETF Local
Communities.:
1. What is your knowledge of and experience with the IETF before
attending?
2. Did this event meet your expectations? Was it interesting or
productive? Would you attend another similar event?
3. What types of events would be interesting? Technical
discussions, social/informal discussion, remote hubs,
hackathons, joint draft or RFC review and discussion, other?
4. How did you hear about the event?
5. Are you aware of the following ways to learn about future events
and IETF-related activities?
6. What technical areas would you be interested in working on in
the IETF?
7. Do you feel prepared to engage on IETF Working Group mailing
lists and review drafts? What type of support would help?
8. Does your affiliation/day-job understand the benefits of
participating in the IETF?
9. How might the IETF make participating easier?
10. What WG sessions have you attended?
11. What could be done better?
12. What IETF topics would inspire you to participate?
Atlas, et al. Expires January 4, 2018 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft I-D July 2017
8. IANA Considerations
This document has no impact on IANA registries.
9. Security Considerations
The policies in this document provide support and oversight of
geographically-focused IETF activities so that the IETF name and logo
are not misrepresented and so that the IETF's IPR and Anti-Harassment
policies are followed. An appeal path is provided to handle
problems.
10. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC7154] Moonesamy, S., Ed., "IETF Guidelines for Conduct", BCP 54,
RFC 7154, DOI 10.17487/RFC7154, March 2014,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7154>.
[RFC7776] Resnick, P. and A. Farrel, "IETF Anti-Harassment
Procedures", BCP 25, RFC 7776, DOI 10.17487/RFC7776, March
2016, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7776>.
[RFC8179] Bradner, S. and J. Contreras, "Intellectual Property
Rights in IETF Technology", BCP 79, RFC 8179,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8179, May 2017,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8179>.
Authors' Addresses
Alia Atlas
Juniper Networks
Email: akatlas@juniper.net
Christian O'Flaherty
ISOC
Email: oflaherty@isoc.org
Atlas, et al. Expires January 4, 2018 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft I-D July 2017
Harish Chowdhary
NIXI
Email: harish@nixi.in
Atlas, et al. Expires January 4, 2018 [Page 14]