Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb

[Pete Resnick <[e-mail]>]

On 12/2/13 6:28 AM, Jari Arkko wrote:

> Community decides: I think it is important that the WG and the IETF community decides what to do in this case. The WG is in a deadlock, and they should be able to decide - by consensus - if they want to attempt resolving this in a particular way. Including alternate decision mechanisms. Of course, we all may have opinions about how that resolution should happen. I'm personally in the "coin toss" camp (but see further below).
>
> And I'm reluctant for us in the management to attempt to override the decision in any way. Lets learn what the community wants to do. If you do not like the proposal on the table, make your opinion known or propose an alternative. Also, I've heard a couple of arguments saying that we should be worried about appeals on this matter. I'd say we should just try to the right thing.
>    

Jari, I think we should all be clear that "community decides" is not 
carte blanche. For example, a WG can't simply decide on its own that it 
will no longer take decisions on the mailing list, but that all 
decisions will be taken face-to-face and simply announced on the mailing 
list. That would be directly against a documented process on which we 
have IETF consensus, and it would take a conscious change of that 
process by the entire community to do that. If such a process were being 
suggested, I think the IESG would have an obligation to step in.

In this case, the waters are much murkier (there's nothing that 
specifically says we can't vote), so I think it's reasonable to let the 
community take a stab at how it wants proceed. If the WG can come up 
with a process that involves sticking hands up in the air or paper 
ballots or whatever that still protects (to quote a certain document) 
"the rights of all parties in a fair and open Internet Standards 
Process", then we're doing "the right thing". But they do have to come 
up with that fair and open process. I for one am willing to wait and see 
if the WG and the larger IETF community can come to consensus on how to 
do that.

pr

-- 
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - [phone]