File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 1 Margaret Wasserman WG Chairs Training

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 2 WG Chairs Training Roles and responsibilities The Working Group process Consensus and problem solving Administrivia

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 3 WG Leadership Roles Chair – WG management Document editor – reflect WG consensus in specification Responsible AD – Area management

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 4 AD & WG Chair Powers Chair can replace document editors ● Should have the backing of AD AD can strongly recommend replacement of document editor AD can replace chair AD can close down the WG

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 5 WG Chair Responsibilities Keep the processes open and fair Negotiate charter and charter updates with ADs Keep milestones up-to-date Schedule meetings and set agendas Choose/replace document editors Judge WG consensus Select and manage the editors and the WG to produce high quality, relevant output ● Meets published document format/standards (ID-nits) ● High technical quality and relevance/usefulness

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 6 Editor Responsibilities Produce a document that meets WG consensus Raise issues for discussion and resolution at meetings or on the list ● If contention, WG chair judges consensus Track document issues and resolutions ● Some type of issue tracking software or tools are recommended, but not required

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 7 WG Chair Tasks Schedule meetings and plan agendas Run meetings, produce minutes, return blue sheets ● Make sure that minute-taker is assigned Maintain WG milestones Manage/moderate the WG mailing list Keep track of WG work item status and make it clear to the WG ● Issue WG last calls ● Submit documents to the IESG when appropriate Make sure that document processes are followed Manage up – track documents with IESG, etc.

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 8 Required Reading RFC 2026: Internet Standards Process ● Explains document processes, appeals process, etc. RFC 2418: IETF WG Guidelines and Procedures ● Defines WG chair role, rules for conducting WG buisness, etc.

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 9 WG Chairs Training Roles and responsibilities The Working Group process Consensus and problem solving Administrivia

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 10 Understanding the WG Process Why do we need to reach common understanding of our processes? ● The process will work more efficiently ● The process can be applied more consistently  Leads to more actual and perceived fairness ● WG members can provide useful input to complex process decisions, and help keep the chairs honest :-) ● We can better separate process discussions and technical discussions

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 11 Goals of the WG Process Follow the spirit of the IETF process, not just the letter ● Openness and fairness  All issues/changes to WG work items should be discussed openly in the WG ● Focus on producing output that is both technically sound and useful  Raise the bar for acceptance as a WG work item, and for sending work to the IESG  Identifying problems earlier is less painful and more efficient

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 12 Steps in the WG Process Initial Submission Author Refinement WG Acceptance Editor Selection WG Refinement WG Last Call

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 13 Steps in the WG Process Initial Submission ● Original idea or issue is submitted to the WG  May be done via mailing list or at a meeting  Complex ideas/issues should be submitted as Internet- Drafts ● Chairs will reject submissions that don’t fit within the WG charter, in our judgment  May refer submission to more appropriate groups or areas ● Chairs should reject submissions that aren't relevant or don't meet minimal quality requirements

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 14 Steps in the WG Process Author Refinement ● Idea is more fully documented or refined based on feedback  May be done by the person who originally submitted the idea/issue, or by others  May be done by individual, ad hoc group or more formal design team ● Change control lies with author(s) during this phase

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 15 Steps in the WG Process WG Acceptance ● For a document to become a WG work item, it must:  Fit within the WG charter (in the opinion of the chairs)  Have significant support from the working group, including: – People with expertise in all applicable areas who are willing to invest time to review the document, provide feedback, etc. – Probable (or current) implementors, if applicable

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 16 Steps in the WG Process WG Acceptance ● For a document to become a WG work item, it must:  Be accepted as a work item by a rough consensus of the WG – Should reflect WG belief that the document is taking the correct approach and would be a good starting place for a WG product  Have corresponding goals/milestones in the charter – Approved by the Area Directors

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 17 Steps in the WG Process Editor Selection ● Editor(s) will be selected by the WG chairs  Usually one or more of the original authors  Must be willing to set aside personal technical agendas and change the document based solely on WG consensus  Must have the time and interest to drive the work to completion in a timely manner

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 18 Steps in the WG Process WG Refinement ● Document updated based on WG consensus  All technical issues and proposed changes MUST be openly discussed on the list and/or in meetings  All changes must be proposed to the mailing list – Complex changes should be proposed in separate IDs  The WG has change control during this phase – Changes are only made based on WG consensus – During this phase, silence will indicate consent

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 19 Steps in the WG Process WG Last Call ● Final check that the WG has rough consensus to advance the document to the IESG  WG consensus indicates that the WG believes that this document is both technically sound and useful, and ready to go to the IESG

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 20 Steps in the WG Process WG Last Call ● The document must be reviewed and actively supported by a significant number of people, including experts in all applicable areas, or it will not be sent to the IESG  Why would we want to waste IESG time on a document that we can’t be bothered to review ourselves? ● Silence does NOT indicate consent during this phase

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 21 WG Chairs Training Roles and responsibilities The Working Group process Consensus and problem solving Administrivia

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 22 Rough Consensus "We reject kings, presidents and voting. We believe in rough consensus and running code." -- Dave Clark

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 23 Consensus Clearly dominant agreement Does not have to be unanimous Chair(s) judge consensus Alternatives to "voting"  humm  show of hands (sorta like voting but...) Even harder on a mailing list  ask for "humm" & provide list of hummers at end? May have to discard parts to get consensus on rest

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 24 Structured Discussion Slides Recommend use of slides for structured discussion and consensus calls Openness includes accessibility to non-native English speakers, hearing-impaired people, etc. Written consensus questions result in higher quality and more credible responses

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 25 Consideration for ESL participants (in IETF Meetings) Rule of Thumb - Use simple English Repeat the question and do a quick summary before moving on to the next topic Prepare important questions before hand and flash them on the screen before taking consensus Be patient … they take some time to articulate ● A translator would help but not encouraged

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 26 Consideration for ESL participants (in Mailing Lists) Rule of Thumb : Command of English != Technical competency Tolerate broken English but never try to guess what they say if it is not obvious Get to know some friends who is multilingual and ask them to help to bridge ● Never ignore their ideas in the process of building consensus If they are writing I-Ds, encourage a co-author who has better command of English

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 27 Consideration for ESL participants (Culture differences) Rule of Thumb: Listen, Ask and Listen Don’t believe in what you think you listen ● Different culture have different choice of words Some people considered IETF environment very hostile or aggressive ● Encourage them to read the Taos of IETF Not all likes to voice their opinion in public ● Speak to them in private after meeting or over s when building rough consensus

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 28 WG Venues ● International participation ● Inefficient but extensive discussion Face-to-face meetings ● At IETF, other times (interim meetings) ● Must be well advertised four weeks ahead of time ● Can not make "final" decisions ● Verify all consensus points via

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 29 Appeal Process Process &/or technical appeal to WG chair Process &/or technical appeal to AD Process &/or technical appeal to IESG ● via to IESG list Process &/or technical appeal to IAB ● via to IAB list Standards process appeal to ISOC BoT ● via to ISOC president

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 30 Appeals Make clear, concise statement of the problem ● with backup documentation (separate) Make it clear that it is an appeal (not just info) Make specific suggestions for remedy Do not try and jump the steps ● wait for specific response for each step Avoid personal attacks

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 31 IPR IPR a BIG problem Many patents on technology now granted Will be hard to avoid encumbered technology in future Should prefer technology with no known IPR issues Use standards process to see if licenses are fair ● multiple implementations must use multiple licenses

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 32 IPR Disclosure WG participants should disclose IPR conflicts to WG chair ● may not be able to - patent pending ● may not know what others in company are doing WG participants should not push technology when they have a hidden IPR conflict

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 33 WG Chairs Training Roles and responsibilities The Working Group process Consensus and problem solving Administrivia

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 34 WG Mailing Lists and Web Pages MUST be on the mailing list ● ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf-mail-archive/acronym  Additional archive, not the only archive WG web page can include link to additional web page ● Maintain WG work item status, etc.

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 35 Web Pages to Know About WG Chairs web page ● IESG web page ● ID-Tracker ● RFC Editors web page ●

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 36 Useful Addresses WG Chairs Mailing List: Admin Actions: Process Actions/Issues: iesg-

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 37 Credits for Presentation Dave Crocker Sue Hares Paul Mockapetris Allison Mankin Joyce Reynolds Deirdre Kostick Scott Bradner Jeff Schiller Steve Coya Margaret Wasserman

File: /ram/wgchairs.sxi Date: 10 February, 2016 Slide 38 Questions? It is OK to ask questions and ask for help