Re: [dnsext] the DNS Directorate and the end of dnsext

[[e-mail]]

On Sun, Dec 04, 2011 at 11:43:28AM +0000, Jim Reid wrote:
> On 4 Dec 2011, at 05:52, [e-mail] wrote:
> 
> >YMMV of course, but I think leaving a directorate intact,  
> >unaccountable to the  community, is a -really bad idea-.
> 
> Bill, whatever your views on the accountability or otherwise of the  
> DNS Directorate, the topic is surely orthogonal to what happens to  
> dnsext?

	perhaps.  if a directorate exists without a foundational 
	wg to support it, what you end up with is an effective censure board
	that rules on proposed changes to the DNS, absent broad input 
	from the community.  absent a WG, what are the rules for 
	becoming a member of the directorate and how is a member removed
	for cause?   If you are comfortable w/ the IESG and the ADs making 
	DNS protocol choices on yur behalf, then that is your perogative.
	
	I for one, am not and would like the ability to have/conviene
	a WG to solve DNS issues -BY THE COMMUNITY- and not by a closed,
	opaque body that is not accountable to that community.

> I would presume the DNS Directorate (fine fellows that they are) are  
> accountable by the wise words of advice given to the ADs and WGs  
> whenever they need them. That said, it should be easier to find the  
> Directorates' home page on the IETF web site. [Perhaps a link on the  
> left hand-side, just like there is for WGs, IESG and so on.] It seems  
> this can only be found by feeding "Directorate" into the search box in  
> the top corner of www.ietf.org.


	I have the answer on who,  we don't have answers on succession
	or accountablity

/bill