Re: [IAB] Last Call: Modern Global Standards Paradigm

[Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]>]

On Aug 12, 2012, at 19:51, Stewart Bryant <[e-mail]> wrote:

> If I interpret what you seem to be saying, it is that you care
> more for the micro-observance of IETF protocol, than
> taking steps to avoid Internet governance being
> transferred by government decree to a secretive
> agency of the UN that runs by government majority.

That is the question that is not clear to me either.

I do believe the process question is an absolutely useful one.  We should have a process that is able to handle multilateral activities that include the IETF, with an element of negotiation, even compromise, and so on.  This is a case where leadership is actually required, and I don't think that process is an established one at all.  We do know how to run liaisons, which is probably the closest model to adhere to.  We know why we have handed the keys to this to the IAB.  (The present document is not prescriptive anyway, it is descriptive, and the IETF chair in concert with the IAB chair should be able to act on this level after a modicum of consultation.)

If the process question was actually raised to derail the signing of the current document, my reaction would be quite similar to Stewart's.
As I said before, sometimes you have to act.

Grüße, Carsten