IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Gen-art] Re: GenART review of draft-alvestrand-ipod-01.txt

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Mon, 12 June 2006 14:12 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fpn97-0002du-Ci; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:12:01 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fpn96-0002dn-A5 for gen-art@ietf.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:12:00 -0400
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([158.38.152.233]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Fpn92-0002cx-MM for gen-art@ietf.org; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:12:00 -0400
Received: from localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC6012596EE; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 16:10:54 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 14995-02; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 16:10:14 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [172.28.60.246] (unknown [62.92.16.50]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 726D12596EC; Mon, 12 Jun 2006 16:10:14 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <448D7611.3040402@alvestrand.no>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 16:11:29 +0200
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.4 (Windows/20060516)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Brian E Carpenter <brc@zurich.ibm.com>
References: <F222151D3323874393F83102D614E05502B66D66@CORPUSMX20A.corp.emc.com> <44820CAF.5020402@alvestrand.no> <448D38D7.2030600@zurich.ibm.com>
In-Reply-To: <448D38D7.2030600@zurich.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at alvestrand.no
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab
Cc: gen-art@ietf.org, Black_David@emc.com
Subject: [Gen-art] Re: GenART review of draft-alvestrand-ipod-01.txt
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/gen-art>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: gen-art-bounces@ietf.org

Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Let me put it this way.
>
> Under RFC 2026 as it has been interpreted over the years, the IESG
> has a lot of latitude to decide on procedures for things that are
> (deliberately or not) left vague in the BCPs.
>
> Sometimes, the IESG has documented these procedural decisions,
> and sometimes not; but never systematically. Or it has delegated
> decisions to others, who have done (or not done) the same.
>
> This experiment doesn't change the IESG's implied authority, but
> it creates a systematic way to document procedural decisions.
> If the experiment succeeds, I agree that David's points *will*
> need to be tied down.
>
> It's actually my opinion that a formal RFC 3933 experiment is
> probably not actually needed in this case - we could just do
> it. But the experiment should give us a nice framework. 
I also agree with Sam that testing whether we CAN run an RFC 3933 
experiment is a Good Thing.


_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email