RE: CD PROPOSAL: SYSCON (Interim Decision 8/24)
The intention of this content decision may have been somewhat
misinterpreted. I apologize for the poor wording which may have
caused this problem.
The intention of SYSCON was to make explicit an approach I've taken
all along, i.e. to consider how the CVE might be used (directly or
indirectly) by a sysadmin. This is a reflection of our initial goals
as stated in the CERIAS paper (i.e. tool interoperability) as well as
the fact that sysadmins don't really have a voice on the Board at this
Sysadmin consideration has never been the sole factor in any content
decision or candidate proposal. Generally, I have tried to consider
the sysadmin perspective when discussing other content decisions.
This is because the only sysadmin representation we have on the Board
is indirectly through other Board members.
The language of this content decision (and its existence) does appear
to impose the sysadmin perspective above others, and that is in direct
conflict with another goal of the CVE, i.e. independence from multiple
Most voting Board members are advocating REJECTing this content
decision. But it will remain in Proposal phase until its scheduled
Interim Decision on August 24, to allow time for further commentary if