Re: Scenario C prerequisites
sob@harvard.edu (scott bradner) Wed, 22 September 2004 13:19 UTC
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA04993; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 09:19:14 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CA78F-0006r0-Oj; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 09:26:04 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CA6wG-00086r-KK; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 09:13:40 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CA6ni-0006F4-5i for ietf@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 09:04:50 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA03652 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 09:04:48 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from newdev.eecs.harvard.edu ([140.247.60.212] helo=newdev.harvard.edu) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CA6uH-0006WM-C0 for ietf@ietf.org; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 09:11:38 -0400
Received: by newdev.harvard.edu (Postfix, from userid 501) id 71BE4A72D9; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 09:04:18 -0400 (EDT)
To: ietf@ietf.org
Message-Id: <20040922130418.71BE4A72D9@newdev.harvard.edu>
Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 09:04:18 -0400
From: sob@harvard.edu
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 69a74e02bbee44ab4f8eafdbcedd94a1
Subject: Re: Scenario C prerequisites
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: ietf-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 9ed51c9d1356100bce94f1ae4ec616a9
Harald opines: > > re: 1/ Considering the level of participation in this discussion on the > > IETF list I do not see how one could assert that there was IETF > > consensus without an explicit discussion at an IETF plenary - I do not > > think that just issuing a last call (as envisioned by the Scenario C > > document) would be seen by about anyone as an adequate involvement of > > the community. > > I am not at all certain of that. In what way is 20 people arguing in front > of a thousand people in a room more "community involvement" than the same > 20 people arguing in front of a thousand people on a mailing list? because this way you are sure that the thousand people at least know what is going on and have a chance to express their view if they think things are going wrong (in person or on the list during last call) > Our tradition as IETF has been to declare that mailing list discussion is > the final arbiter of consensus. If we need to abandon that principle for > organizational matters, we leave ourselves in a situation where we can only > make significant decisions at 4-month intervals; that is a theoretically > defensible position, but sharply limits the scope of what we can hope to > accomplish in any given timeframe. I trust we will not be reorganizing at this level all that often - I think that adding or subtracting an area does not need a plenary session but changing the legal basis of the endeavor is a rather important step, one that should not be done on the basis of 10 people expressing their opinion on a list. i.e., I think some things are important enough to require the full measure of due diligence - this level of reorganization is an example as was the ravin discussion - waiting until the next face to face meeting for a public discussion does not seem to be too big a issue when we are talking about a change that (historically) comes around every 18 years. Scott _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
- Re: Scenario C prerequisites scott bradner