[AFS3-std] Re: Consensus Call - AFS3-Standardization Charter

[Love Hörnquist Åstrand]

I was fine with Simons proposal last time around and still find it ok.

Love

7 jul 2010 kl. 16:08 skrev Jeffrey Hutzelman <jhutz@cmu.edu>:

> IMPORTANT:
> This has gotten fairly lengthy, but please read through to the end.  This =

> message contains important information on the future of AFS protocol 
> standardization work, and a specific request for input from the AFS 
> community (that is, YOUR input) within the next 2 weeks.
> 
> PLEASE send followups to afs3-standardization@openafs.org
> 
> 
> Back in January of 2006, the afs3-standardization@openafs.org mailing list=
 
> was created in order to provide a forum for discussion of the AFS protocol=
s 
> and particularly to coordinate extensions and changes to those protocols =

> among the various implementations.  The first discussions in that vein 
> started the following month, with Jeffrey Altman's proposal to define new =

> GetCapabilities RPC's for each of the various RPC services.  Since then, =

> there have been discussions on a wide variety of proposed extensions, some=
 
> small and some much larger in scope.  Overall, I consider the mailing list=
 
> to have been and continue to be a success.
> 
> Two years ago, at the AFS & Kerberos Best Practices Workshop at NJIT in =

> Newark, NJ, there was some discussion about the prospect of establishing a=
 
> more formal charter and process for the standardization group, and 
> especially of insuring its independence from any one implementation.  Afte=
r 
> the workshop, Simon Wilkinson took a stab at writing such a charter, and =

> sent his proposal to the afs3-standardization mailing list (see Simon's =

> message to that list, dated 15-Jul-2008).  This prompted quite a lot of =

> discussion and two additional drafts over following couple of months. Afte=
r 
> the third draft, there was exactly one additional comment, and there has =

> been no further discussion since.
> 
> It is my personal belief that there was general agreement within the 
> community to move forward with Simon's draft as an initial charter for the=
 
> standardization group.  However, there has been little progress in the las=
t 
> 21 months.  Much of this is my fault -- I kept saying I was going to do =

> something and then not getting around to it.  However, while the document =

> hasn't been discussed much in the interim, my conversations during that =

> time with various individuals, in person and online, lead me to believe =

> that there is _still_ general agreement to proceed with Simon's draft.
> 
> 
> 
> So, here's what I'm going to do about it...
> 
> Simon's document calls for a bootstrapping process in which a registrar =

> group is form of the then-current registrar (myself) plus one 
> representative from each current implementation (IBM, OpenAFS, kAFS, Arla)=
 
> that cares to provide one.  The registrars would then serve as vote-takers=
 
> in an initial election of two chairs as described in section 2.2.2 of the =

> draft.
> 
> The initial bootstrapping of the registrars has already mostly taken place=
. 
> Thomas Kula has agreed to serve as a registrar representing OpenAFS, and =

> has held that position officially since the 2009 workshop.  Around that =

> time, I asked IBM, kAFS, and Arla to nominate registrars, but I have yet t=
o 
> receive a response that resulted in an actual volunteer.  If any of those =

> organizations wants to nominate someone, please contact me.  Otherwise, =

> Thomas and I have already agreed that we will nonetheless increase the siz=
e 
> of the registrar group to at least three and seek out a volunteer to fill =

> the vacant position.  It is my hope that we can accomplish that by the end=
 
> of the month.
> 
> The next step would seem to be the bootstrapping of the chairs.  However, =

> we have a recursive-dependency problem here -- before we can use the 
> election process defined in Simon's document with any confidence, we must =

> be sure we have consensus among the community to use that document. 
> However, lacking a chair, there is no formal means of determining consensu=
s.
> Chicken, meet Egg.
> 
> Simon's document itself proposes part of the solution to this problem, in =

> the form of the last paragraph of section 3, which calls on the 
> newly-formed group to develop, adopt, and publish its own charter.  To 
> complete the solution, the registrars note that the first step (indeed, th=
e 
> first several steps) in electing new chairs rest on our hands.  Thus, we =

> are taking the following actions:
> 
> 
> (1) I have asked Simon to submit the latest version of his proposed charte=
r
>    in the form of an Internet-Draft.  That draft is now available at
>    <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wilkinson-afs3-standardisation-00>
> 
> (2) On behalf of the registrars, I am issuing this consensus call.  This
>    is an attempt to elicit comments and to discover whether there is
>    rough consensus in the AFS community to begin formalizing the protocol
>    standards process as described in the draft named above.  I am asking
>    everyone to review the proposed charter and send any comments to the
>    mailing list, afs3-standardization@openafs.org, within the next 2
>    weeks.
> 
> (3) On or shortly after Wednesday, July 21, 2010, the registrars will
>    examine the comments received and make a determination as to whether
>    we believe such a consensus exists.  Depending on the state affairs,
>    we may choose to wait a while longer for discussion to die down before
>    making a determination.  In other words, this is not a hard deadline;
>    it is only the earliest date on which we will make any decision.
> 
> If at this point the registrars believe that there is not a rough consensu=
s 
> to adopt Simon's draft charter and that no such consensus is forthcoming, =

> we will simply stop.  Things will continue as they are today, with no 
> formal process, unless or until someone tries again.
> 
> However, if the registrars believe that a rough consensus _does_ exist, we=
 
> will more or less immediately begin the election process as described in =

> section 2.2.2, with the full set of registrars (at least Thomas and myself=
, 
> and preferably at least one other) serving as vote-takers.  Our goal will =

> be to follow the timeline set out in that document.  However, this is 
> incumbent on the community reaching a consensus in time to start the 
> election process no later than early August.  If a consensus emerges, but =

> more slowly, then we will adjust the timeline accordingly.
> 
> 
> Here's the important bit again:
> 
> Please take the time to review draft-wilkinson-afs3-standardization-00.txt=
.
> Send your questions and comments to <afs3-standardization@openafs.org>.
> Please comment even if it's just to say "I support this" or "I oppose this=
".
> Please send your comments in by Wednesday, July 21, 2010.
> 
> 
> -- Jeffrey T. Hutzelman (N3NHS) <jhutz+@cmu.edu>
>   for the AFS Assigned Numbers Registrars
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Arla-drinkers mailing list
> Arla-drinkers@stacken.kth.se
> https://lists.stacken.kth.se/mailman/listinfo/arla-drinkers