Re: ISMS working group and charter problems

> Certainly one of the reasons I requested IETF-wide review for the ISMS
> recharter is so that decisions like this can be reviewed by the
> community.  The IAB gets to see charters at about the same time as the
> IESG does; they have sent no negative comments to this charter.

Sam, I've tried to search the ietf-announce archives, google, etc. for any sort 
of announcements, outside of the isms working group, concerning the draft 
re-chartering text for isms.  Unfortunately I have not been able to find it, so 
I do not know what request of yours you are referring to.

In any event, I think the significance of Eliot's (and Steve Bellovin's) 
postings have less to do with a chartering event and more to do with decisions 
made DURING a working group's normal activities.  In particular, when a working 
group gets to the point of making a decision that has broad architectural or 
operational impact, it is the expertise of ADs, IAB members, and other senior 
participants, that can serve to raise a question to the larger community, 
exactly as Eliot is now doing.

What I took from Steve Bellovin's posting was the implication that his valid 
concerns were expressed in a more limited context.  What I am suggesting is that 
we should get into the habit of having such concerns raised in the broader 
community, when the impact is this large.

-- 

   d/

  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  +1.408.246.8253
  dcrocker  a t ...
  WE'VE MOVED to:  www.bbiw.net

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