Update to the IETF Anti-Harassment Procedures for the Replacement of the IETF Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) with the IETF Administration LLC
draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc7776bis-03

[Ballot comment]
Thanks for the discussion about what we mean when we request to
update the metadata ("Updates:) headers.

It's also not entirely clear to me that we need to Update 7776 to remove
the references to its updating of 7437, since
RFC-7776-the-immutable-artifact does/did indeed update 7437; it's just
that 7437 itself is no longer current/relevant.

[Ballot discuss]
I would like to discuss a little bit exactly what we want to happen to
the metadata attached to RFC 7776.  It seems reasonable to apply the
same "the logical updated version of the document has this new text not
this old text" treatment we are giving the body contents to the bits at
the top of the first page (to the extent that it is reasonable to do at
all, viz. Magnus's Discuss).  But are we also asking for any of the
"live" metadata in the indices associated with the RFC Series to change,
even though that would bring them in conflict with the immutable RFC
artifacts?

[Ballot comment]
It's also not entirely clear to me that we need to Update 7776 to remove
the references to its updating of 7437, since
RFC-7776-the-immutable-artifact does/did indeed update 7437; it's just
that 7437 itself is no longer current/relevant.

[Ballot comment]
(1) +1 on Barry Leiba’s COMMENT about updating meta-data

(2) A few nits:
-- Multiple places.  Typo.  s/Adminstrative/Administrative/g
-- Section 2.3.  Consistent spacing/typo.  s/obmudsteam/Ombudsteam/.

[Ballot discuss]
I don't understand why not a replacement for RFC7776 was produced instead of this soup that is not readable. Publishing this in this form is providing very mixed messages to the community where we (IESG) apparently are aiming for readability and ease of comparing older and newer documents, but can't be bothered to ensure that is produced when it comes to the process documents. Also RFC 7776 appears to be very self contained and with removal of content that will be even more true.

[Ballot comment]
I must admit that I also find the OLD / NEW less than easy to read -- however I believe that this is the appropriate / best mechanism to use in this particular case.

[Ballot comment]
While I understand why this approach was taken, I have to at least say that I find the OLD/NEW style in section 2.3 not very helpful. Just explaining the change in words would probably have been enough and less confusing.

[Ballot comment]
I have to say that I find the changes to the metadata stuff to be odd and confusing, and would have preferred that 7776bis completely replace 7776 instead of trying to update it.  No action nor response needed here... just wishing it had been handled differently.


Typo: “contained updated” should be “contained updates” in both the Abstract and Introduction.

(Via drafts-lastcall@iana.org): IESG/Authors/WG Chairs:

The IANA Functions Operator has reviewed draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc7776bis-02, which is currently in Last Call, and has the following comments:

We understand that this document doesn't require any registry actions.

While it's often helpful for a document's IANA Considerations section to remain in place upon publication even if there are no actions, if the authors strongly prefer to remove it, we do not object.

If this assessment is not accurate, please respond as soon as possible.

Thank you,

Sabrina Tanamal
Senior IANA Services Specialist

The following Last Call announcement was sent out (ends 2019-08-14):

From: The IESG
To: IETF-Announce
CC: iasa20@ietf.org, alissa@cooperw.in, draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc7776bis@ietf.org, Jon Peterson , iasa2-chairs@ietf.org, jon.peterson@team.neustar
Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org
Sender:
Subject: Last Call:  (Update to the IETF Anti-Harassment Procedures for the Replacement of the IAOC with the IETF Administration LLC) to Best Current Practice


The IESG has received a request from the IETF Administrative Support Activity
2 WG (iasa2) to consider the following document: - 'Update to the IETF
Anti-Harassment Procedures for the Replacement of
  the IAOC with the IETF Administration LLC'
  as Best Current Practice

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final
comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2019-08-14. Exceptionally, comments may be
sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of
the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

Abstract


  The IETF Anti-Harassment Procedures are described in RFC 7776.

  The IETF Administrative Oversight Committee (IAOC) has been replaced
  by the IETF Administration LLC, and the IETF Adminstrative Director
  has been replaced by the IETF LLC Executive Director.  This document
  updates RFC 7776 to amend these terms.

  RFC 7776 contained updated to RFC 7437.  draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc7437bis
  has incorporated those updates, so this document also updates RFC
  7776 to remove those updates.

NOTE for RFC Editor and Readers of this Document

  When published as an RFC

  o  All references to and mentions of draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc7437bis in
      this document should be replaced by the RFC that results from
      draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc7437bis.

  o  The string "XXXX" should be replaced with the RFC number assigned
      to the RFC that results from draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc7437bis.

  o  This note should be removed.




The file can be obtained via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc7776bis/

IESG discussion can be tracked via
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-iasa2-rfc7776bis/ballot/


No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.

1. Summary

In much the style of the IANA2.0 WG's consolidated update draft, this document specifies a number of OLD/NEW style changes to the original RFC7776 to reflect the elimination of the IAOC and the renaming of the IETF Administrative Director. Also, as RFC7776 updated RFC7437 to rectify one rather narrow point, that point was simply rolled into RFC7437bis already, so there is no longer a need for RFC7776bis to update that specification.

2. Review and Consensus

This document was thoroughly reviewed by the IASA2.0 WG, and received a good amount of comment. Getting the interaction with RFC7437bis right did require a bit of working out. There is a consensus to advance this specification.

3. Intellectual Property

This document is not a protocol specification and it contains no technical solutions that might require a disclosure.

4. Other Points

NIT: Intro:

"updates RFC 7776 too amend these term and" should be "amend these terms and".

also

"RFC 7776 contained updated to [RFC7437" should be "contained updates".

1. Summary

In much the style of the IANA2.0 WG's consolidated update draft, this document specifies a number of OLD/NEW style changes to the original RFC7776 to reflect the elimination of the IAOC and the renaming of the IETF Administrative Director. Also, as RFC7776 updated RFC7437 to rectify one rather narrow point, that point was simply rolled into RFC7437bis already, so there is no longer a need for RFC7776bis to update that specification.

2. Review and Consensus

This document was thoroughly reviewed by the IASA2.0 WG, and received a good amount of comment. Getting the interaction with RFC7437bis right did require a bit of working out. There is a consensus to advance this specification.

3. Intellectual Property

This document is not a protocol specification and it contains no technical solutions that might require a disclosure.

4. Other Points

NIT: Intro:

"updates RFC 7776 too amend these term and" should be "amend these terms and".

also

"RFC 7776 contained updated to [RFC7437" should be "contained updates".