< draft-elkschul-conflict-problem-00.txt   draft-elkschul-conflict-problem-01.txt >
INTERNET-DRAFT N. Elkins INTERNET-DRAFT N. Elkins
EDCO, Inc. Inside Products, Inc.
H. Schulzrinne H. Schulzrinne
Intended Status: Informational Columbia University Intended Status: Informational Columbia University
Expires: May 12, 2019 November 8, 2018 Expires: June 8, 2019 December 5, 2018
Conflict Resolution within a Working Group: Problem Statement Conflict Resolution within a Working Group: Problem Statement
draft-elkschul-conflict-problem-00 draft-elkschul-conflict-problem-01
Abstract Abstract
At the IETF, we currently use a set of methods to communicate a point At the IETF, we currently use a set of methods to communicate a point
of view, to solicit input, to resolve conflict and attempt to obtain of view, to solicit input, to resolve conflict and attempt to obtain
consensus within the group. These methods include: writing an consensus within the group. These methods include: writing an
Internet Draft, discussion on email lists, discussion at face-to- Internet Draft, discussion on email lists, discussion at face-to-
face, interim or virtual meetings, and design teams. At times, these face, interim or virtual meetings, and design teams. At times, these
methods fall short. People become entrenched in their positions. A methods fall short. People become entrenched in their positions. A
Working Group may be split 80-20 or 70-30 for a prolonged period. Working Group may be split for a prolonged period wasting time and
This wastes time and energy and may have a lasting impact. This energy. There may be a lasting impact. While the authors support
document discusses the benefits and drawbacks of each of the current rough consensus, the collateral damage of this process, at times can
methods of communication focusing solely on their efficacy at be considerable. This document discusses the benefits and drawbacks
conflict resolution. A companion document will propose some of each of the current methods of communication focusing solely on
solutions including alternative methods of conflict resolution. their efficacy at conflict resolution. A companion document will
propose some solutions including alternative methods of conflict
resolution.
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as other groups may also distribute working documents as
Internet-Drafts. Internet-Drafts.
skipping to change at page 3, line 10 skipping to change at page 3, line 10
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.1 Conflict about Design Details . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1.1 Conflict about Design Details . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.2 Fundamental Disagreement and Competing Goals . . . . . . . . 5 1.2 Fundamental Disagreement and Competing Goals . . . . . . . . 5
1.3 Cultural Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1.3 Values-Based Conflict . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.4 Cultural Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2. Current Methods of Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2. Current Methods of Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1 Writing an Internet Draft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.1 Writing an Internet Draft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1.1 Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.1.1 Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.1.2 Shortcomings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.1.2 Shortcomings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2 Discussion on Email Lists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.2 Discussion on Email Lists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2.1 Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.2.1 Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.2.2 Shortcomings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.2.2 Shortcomings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3 Discussion at Face-to-Face or Interim Meetings . . . . . . . 8 2.3 Discussion at Face-to-Face or Interim Meetings . . . . . . . 8
2.3.1 Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 2.3.1 Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.3.2 Shortcomings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.3.2 Shortcomings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.4 Design Teams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.4 Design Teams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.4.1 Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.4.1 Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.4.2 Shortcomings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.4.2 Shortcomings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3 Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 3 Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4 IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4 IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1 Introduction 1 Introduction
At the IETF, we currently use a set of methods to communicate a point At the IETF, we currently use a set of methods to communicate a point
of view, to solicit input, to resolve conflict and attempt to obtain of view, to solicit input, to resolve conflict and attempt to obtain
consensus within the group. rough consensus within the group.
These methods include: writing an Internet Draft, discussion on email Our current methods of communication include: writing an Internet
lists, discussion at face-to-face meetings, discussion in virtual Draft, discussion on email lists, discussion at face-to-face
meetings, and design teams. However, at times, these methods fall meetings, discussion in virtual meetings, and design teams. However,
short. People become entrenched in their positions. A Working Group at times, these methods fall short. People become entrenched in
may be split 80-20, 70-30 or even 50-50 for a prolonged period. This their positions. A Working Group may be split for a prolonged
wastes time and energy and may have a lasting impact. period. This wastes time and energy and may have a lasting impact.
For example, unresolved conflicts may cause the Working Group to For example, unresolved conflicts may cause the Working Group to miss
miss its milestones, and, in more extreme cases, the personal working its milestones, and, in more extreme cases, the personal working
relationships within the Working Group may fray. In even more extreme relationships within the Working Group may fray. In even more extreme
cases, participants that feel that their view was not properly cases, participants that feel that their view was not properly
considered may file an appeal with the IESG or may even take their considered may file an appeal with the IESG or may even take their
work to another standards organization, creating competing and work to another standards organization, creating competing and
conflicting standards. conflicting standards.
This document discusses the benefits and drawbacks of each of the This document discusses the benefits and drawbacks of each of the
current methods of communication. A companion draft will propose current methods of communication. A companion draft will propose
some alternative methods of conflict resolution. These methods some alternative methods of conflict resolution. These methods
should be used if the current methods do not produce the desired should be used if the current methods do not produce the desired
result. Questions arise as to who might determine when that point result. Questions arise as to who might determine when that point
is reached and the procedure for making sure these conflict steps are is reached and the procedure for making sure these conflict steps are
followed or enforced. The first step may be to experiment with some followed or enforced. The first step may be to experiment with some
new methods, and if they are successful, then to move to integrate new methods, and if they are successful, then to move to integrate
them into the life of the community. them into the life of the community.
This document does not propose to overturn the rough consensus
[RFC7282] for making decisions. We would like to discuss the
problems that happen during the process of coming to rough consensus
to see if we can make the process better.
Much of the productive work of the IETF is in the conversations that Much of the productive work of the IETF is in the conversations that
participants have with each other, some lasting for many years. These participants have with each other, some lasting for many years. As an
conversations and relationships sometimes end up as RFCs on a example, this particular draft is the result of a conversation
particular topic or in changing viewpoints of people who are leaders between the authors. These conversations and relationships sometimes
in their field. Disruption and corrosive communication keeps us from end up as RFCs on a particular topic or in changing viewpoints of
doing the best, most innovative work in the best environment. Group people who are leaders in their field. Disruption and corrosive
harmony and cohesiveness are important in an organization such as the communication keeps us from doing the best, most innovative work in
IETF. the best environment. Group harmony and cohesiveness as well as
encouraging diverse viewpoints are important in an organization as
important to the Internet ecosystem as the IETF.
Having said that, conflict is important. It is only by speaking Having said that, conflict is important. It is only by speaking
openly and clearly about the engineering matter at hand, can we get openly and clearly about the engineering matter at hand, can we get
the best resolution. But, when conflict goes on too long, is too the best resolution. But, when conflict goes on too long, is too
harsh, and appears to be going nowhere, then good people get harsh, and appears to be going nowhere, then good people get
discouraged. discouraged.
Conflict is inevitable when there are competing goals. Yet, if it Conflict is inevitable when there are competing goals. Yet, if it
were just an engineering cost / benefit discussion, conflict were just an engineering cost / benefit discussion, conflict
resolution would be simpler. The reader may wish to reflect on resolution would be simpler. The reader may wish to reflect on
conflict within their own family or company. We humans bring conflict within their own family or company. We humans bring
emotion to conflict resolution. There are many psychological emotion to conflict resolution. There are many psychological
articles written on conflict resolution. Many people have jobs as articles written on conflict resolution. Many people have jobs as
professional arbitrators. If conflict resolution were so simple, professional arbitrators. If conflict resolution were so simple,
these people would be out of work. Having said that, fundamentally these people would be out of work. Having said that, fundamentally
different views or competing goals inherently cause tension. This different views, competing goals or values inherently cause tension.
will be discussed in more detail in the next section. This will be discussed in more detail in the next section.
1.1 Conflict about Design Details 1.1 Conflict about Design Details
Some conflicts are about the content or structure of a particular Some conflicts are about the content or structure of a particular
field in the protocol (ex. QUIC SPIN bit, IPv6 prefix /64 or not field in the protocol (ex. QUIC SPIN bit, IPv6 prefix /64 or not
/64). /64).
At times, these conflicts can be resolved by having the parties At times, these conflicts can be resolved by having the parties
discuss the issue privately or by creating a design team. This can discuss the issue privately or by creating a design team. This can
work well, unless there is a fundamental disagreement of values or work well, unless there is a fundamental disagreement of values or
skipping to change at page 5, line 47 skipping to change at page 6, line 6
large amounts of unneeded data impacting other traffic. While large amounts of unneeded data impacting other traffic. While
enterprises may wish to monitor and diagnose problems in both enterprises may wish to monitor and diagnose problems in both
applications and transport. There is an inherent tension with applications and transport. There is an inherent tension with
competing goals. What seems to happen today is that each "side" competing goals. What seems to happen today is that each "side"
sees the value and rationale for its own goals quite clearly while sees the value and rationale for its own goals quite clearly while
discounting the goals of others. discounting the goals of others.
For both the above, new solutions may shorten the time and effort to For both the above, new solutions may shorten the time and effort to
reach consensus. reach consensus.
1.3 Cultural Issues 1.3 Values-Based Conflict
Protocols have impact on what can and cannot be done on networks.
These considerations are sometimes the most hotly debated issues.
Values-based conflicts can include: enabling freedom of speech or
assembly vs. protection of life and safety. Some of these
discussions are held in the HRPC group as well as during the process
of each draft but these are difficult issues and often it seems
easier for many to simply ignore them.
1.4 Cultural Issues
IETF participants are all over the world. So, methods for conflict IETF participants are all over the world. So, methods for conflict
resolution must take this into account. People all over the world resolution must take this into account. People all over the world
need to be able to see and comment. As the IETF transitions to a need to be able to see and comment. As the IETF transitions to a
more and more multicultural set of participants, any methods of more and more multicultural set of participants, any methods of
conflict resolution must take this into account. conflict resolution must take this into account.
2. Current Methods of Communication 2. Current Methods of Communication
In discussing the following methods, we are looking at them only in In discussing the following methods, we are looking at them only in
skipping to change at page 10, line 33 skipping to change at page 10, line 44
There are no security considerations addressed in this document. There are no security considerations addressed in this document.
4 IANA Considerations 4 IANA Considerations
There are no IANA considerations addressed in this document. There are no IANA considerations addressed in this document.
5 References 5 References
5.1 Normative References 5.1 Normative References
[RFC2418] [RFC2418] Bradner, S. "IETF Working Group Guidelines and
Procedures", RFC 2418, September 1998.
[RFC7282] Resnick, P. "On Consensus and Humming in the
IETF", RFC 7282, June 2014.
5.2 Informative References 5.2 Informative References
[IESG-DT] https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/design- [IESG-DT] https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/design-
team.html team.html
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Nalini Elkins Nalini Elkins
Enterprise Data Center Operators, Inc. Inside Products, Inc.
Carmel Valley, CA 93924 Carmel Valley, CA 93924
USA USA
Phone: +1 831 659 8360 Phone: +1 831 659 8360
Email: nalini.elkins@e-dco.com Email: nalini.elkins@insidethestack.com
URI: http://www.e-dco.com URI: http://www.insidethestack.com
Henning Schulzrinne Henning Schulzrinne
Columbia University/Department of Computer Science Columbia University/Department of Computer Science
450 Computer Science Building 450 Computer Science Building
New York, NY 10027 New York, NY 10027
USA USA
Phone: +1 212 939 7004 Phone: +1 212 939 7004
EMail: hgs@cs.columbia.edu EMail: hgs@cs.columbia.edu
URI: http://www.cs.columbia.edu URI: http://www.cs.columbia.edu
 End of changes. 18 change blocks. 
36 lines changed or deleted 60 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/