Re: The "Clerk" function and Standards throughput and quality

--On onsdag, oktober 06, 2004 17:50:04 -0400 John C Klensin 
<john-ietf@jck.com> wrote:

>
>
> --On Wednesday, October 06, 2004 1:07 PM +0200 Harald Tveit Alvestrand
> <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote:
>
>>
>> I do think our thoughts run very much in parallel - I'll be
>> interested to hear more of why you think the "scenario O"
>> organizational format will make it hard to make those support
>> functions work.
>
> Again a misunderstanding -- I don't see "Scenario O" as being either
> better or worse in regard to the above than any other scenario.  My
> concern is with the definition of the Clerk function, which is
> scenario-independent.

Thanks for the clarification!

I thought you might be pointing at the "one staff member - rest of the work 
is contracts", which is a common feature to scenarios C and O. If "all" 
that is required is to modify the description of the "clerk" function, that 
needs to be done before we call for interested parties - it is not on the 
critical path to adopting one scenario for implementation (although all 
clarification early is good).

                                 Harald

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf