Markdown Version | Session Recording

Session Date/Time: 25 Jul 2025 09:30

procon

Summary

The Process Consolidation (procon) Working Group held its kickoff meeting to discuss the consolidation of IETF process documents. The session focused on three main work items: updating RFC 2026 and RFC 2418 to incorporate all subsequent modifications into consolidated documents, revising milestone procedures, and enabling IETF chair delegation capabilities. The working group expressed strong support for adopting the consolidated drafts as starting points, with remaining work to address editorial issues and limited scope substantive changes.

Key Discussion Points

RFC 2026 and 2418 Consolidation (Rich Salz)

• Motivation: Over 20 RFCs have updated RFC 2026 and 2418, making it difficult to understand the current state of IETF processes
• Methodology: Converted documents to Markdown, systematically applied all non-obsoleted updates, incorporated relevant errata, and maintained Git history for transparency
• Key Changes:
  • Pulled out IPR sections to point to subsequent RFCs (5378, 8179) to avoid obsolescence
  • Applied only consensus-based changes, leaving controversial errata unresolved
  • Identified missing updates (RFC 5657 on interop reports, RFC 3669 on WG IP requirements)
• Outstanding Issues:
  • Two unresolved errata requiring working group attention
  • Need for comprehensive review to identify outdated sections
  • Several policy questions about content organization

Process for Handling Non-Editorial Changes

• Categories Identified: Four types of potential changes discussed:
  1. Formal consensus updates (in scope for editorial consolidation)
  2. IETF consensus without formal updates (potentially in scope)
  3. De facto changes without formal consensus (case-by-case discussion needed)
  4. Actual process changes (out of current charter scope)
• Approach: Use GitHub issues with labels to track in-scope vs. future work items
• Philosophy: Maintain high bar for changes to complete consolidation efficiently; unused but not contradictory procedures should generally remain

Milestone Management (David Schinazi)

• Current Problems: Many milestones are years out of date, undermining their utility for external observers
• Proposed Solutions:
  • Make milestones optional on per-working group basis with AD approval
  • Make dates officially optional (formalizing current IESG experiment)
  • Increase flexibility in granularity and sequencing
• Use Cases: Distinguish between new working groups (milestones helpful for sequencing) vs. maintenance groups (milestones less useful)
• Implementation: Preference expressed for incorporating changes into 2418 BIS rather than separate document

IETF Chair Delegation

• Current Draft: Lars Eggert has prepared draft addressing both emergency succession and voluntary delegation
• Key Issues:
  • Whether delegation should be limited to ADs or expanded to include IAB members
  • Emergency succession mechanism details
  • Charter scope question about delegation targets
• Charter Concern: Working group noted that charter may be too restrictive in limiting delegation to ADs only

Decisions and Action Items

Immediate Actions

• Document Adoption: Strong working group support expressed for adopting both RFC 2026 BIS and RFC 2418 BIS drafts as starting points
• Formal Adoption Calls: Chairs will conduct formal adoption calls on mailing list
• Repository Transfer: GitHub repository will be transferred to working group

Process Decisions

• Review Strategy: Leverage GenART and establish review teams for fine-tooth-comb review of consolidated documents
• Issue Management: Use GitHub issues with labels to separate in-scope work from future rechartering topics
• Phased Approach: Complete editorial consolidation first, then address case-by-case substantive issues

Next Steps

Short-term (Next Few Weeks)

• Conduct formal adoption calls for RFC 2026 BIS and RFC 2418 BIS on mailing list
• Transfer GitHub repository to working group
• Begin systematic review process using GenART and volunteer reviewers
• Address outstanding errata and missing updates identified

Medium-term

• Milestone Work: David Schinazi to prepare milestone flexibility changes for integration into 2418 BIS after adoption
• Chair Delegation: Discuss charter scope limitation on mailing list, potentially pursue focused recharter if needed
• Document Reviews: Conduct comprehensive reviews to identify outdated sections and factual errors

Future Considerations

• Evaluate whether additional process consolidation work should be pursued after completing current charter scope
• Consider broader questions about IETF process documentation organization and management
• Assess tooling improvements to better integrate milestone tracking with document status

The working group demonstrated strong consensus on the value of consolidation work while recognizing the need for careful scoping to ensure successful completion of the editorial exercise before pursuing broader process improvements.