Re: Just so I'm clear
Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us> Wed, 24 October 2012 04:23 UTC
Return-Path: <dougb@dougbarton.us>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECAD811E8164 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 21:23:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.367
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.367 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.232, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1DOoZMLWkAJm for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 21:23:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail2.fluidhosting.com (mx22.fluidhosting.com [204.14.89.5]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11ED411E8161 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 21:23:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 30801 invoked by uid 399); 24 Oct 2012 04:23:13 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.0.102?) (dougb@dougbarton.us@12.207.105.210) by mail2.fluidhosting.com with ESMTPAM; 24 Oct 2012 04:23:13 -0000
X-Originating-IP: 12.207.105.210
X-Sender: dougb@dougbarton.us
Message-ID: <50876D39.20502@dougbarton.us>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 21:23:21 -0700
From: Doug Barton <dougb@dougbarton.us>
Organization: http://SupersetSolutions.com/
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121010 Thunderbird/16.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: Just so I'm clear
References: <20121023192135.203AC18C0A4@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> <5086EF82.9060900@dougbarton.us> <20121023200713.GC1861@nsn.com> <5086FBCE.2070503@dougbarton.us> <20121023213251.GF27557@verdi> <50873AB4.1000905@dougbarton.us> <20121024034736.GC52558@crankycanuck.ca>
In-Reply-To: <20121024034736.GC52558@crankycanuck.ca>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.5
OpenPGP: id=1A1ABC84
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 04:23:34 -0000
On 10/23/2012 8:47 PM, Andrew Sullivan wrote: > Let me get this straight: for the sake of procedures that are clearly > designed to be hard to use, While I think that 3777 probably errs on the side of too hard to use, recalling someone from one of these positions _should_ be hard to do, and should not be undertaken lightly. > and on the dubious principle that some > "precedent" is going to be set with respect to doing something that we > have never done before and hope never to do again Thus, the definition of a precedent. > (because we're going to clarify the procedures right now), One hopes, but there are no guarantees in life. > and in the face of an impending > decision by an already-sitting nomcom that is already doing all this > work, That's one of the reasons that the documented procedure is more palatable (barely). > we're going to cleave to using the heavyweight procedure instead > of allowing judgement to carry the day? The problem with that "judgement" that you'd like to use here is that it may be all fine and good in this case, but what about next time? > I just want to be clear about this, since I'm busy running around the > NANOG meeting attempting to encourage operators to devote more of the > time they don't have to IETF activities. I want to be sure I'm > correct in illustrating to them how we have all the bureaucratic > agility of the ITU-T or ICANN and all the legal and political > sophistication of the Occupy Wall Street committees. With respect, you haven't spent much time with either the ITU or ICANN if you think that 3777 is rigidly bureaucratic by their standards. This is one of those situations where we have to take our medicine. Doug
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Barry Leiba
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Barry Leiba
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Eggert, Lars
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Alessandro Vesely
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Yoav Nir
- RE: IAOC Request for community feedback Adrian Farrel
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Rumbidzayi Gadhula
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Pelletier Ray
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Noel Chiappa
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Rumbidzayi Gadhula
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Jari Arkko
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Stephen Farrell
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback John Leslie
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Bob Hinden
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Michael StJohns
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Noel Chiappa
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback SM
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Olafur Gudmundsson
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Michael StJohns
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Doug Barton
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Tobias Gondrom
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Noel Chiappa
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Doug Barton
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback David Kessens
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Doug Barton
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Paul Hoffman
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Henk Uijterwaal
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Michael StJohns
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Bob Hinden
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback joel jaeggli
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback joel jaeggli
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback SM
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Doug Barton
- Just so I'm clear (was: IAOC Request for communit… Andrew Sullivan
- Re: Just so I'm clear Doug Barton
- Re: Just so I'm clear Eliot Lear
- Re: Just so I'm clear Doug Barton
- Re: Just so I'm clear Melinda Shore
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback edj.etc
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback David Morris
- Re: Just so I'm clear Margaret Wasserman
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Bob Hinden
- Just so I'm clear (was: IAOC Request for communit… Andrew Sullivan
- RE: IAOC Request for community feedback Tony Hain
- Re: Just so I'm clear Doug Barton
- Re: Just so I'm clear Martin Rex
- Re: Just so I'm clear Mark Andrews
- Re: rules for the sake of rules, was Just so I'm … John Levine
- Re: Just so I'm clear Yoav Nir
- Re: Just so I'm clear Brian E Carpenter
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Tina TSOU
- RE: Just so I'm clear Tony Hain
- Re: Just so I'm clear Doug Barton
- Re: Just so I'm clear Michael StJohns
- Re: Just so I'm clear Melinda Shore
- Re: Just so I'm clear Michael StJohns
- Re: Just so I'm clear Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Just so I'm clear Doug Barton
- Re: Just so I'm clear David Morris
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Olaf Kolkman
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Dale R. Worley
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Turchanyi Geza
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Bob Hinden
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Bob Hinden
- Re: IAOC Request for community feedback Doug Barton