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

Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> Mon, 13 August 2012 11:25 UTC

Return-Path: <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
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 43F2821F86F4 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 04:25:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.487
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.487 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.112, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W4Y0bu1dHthx for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 04:25:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vc0-f172.google.com (mail-vc0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7DEB221F86F3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 04:25:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vcbfo14 with SMTP id fo14so3713089vcb.31 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 04:25:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=GxYFdpk2e2OpwAbv0k9N6cUfWXDuv2WmuTqmcsvkGXY=; b=PtULrVliFOCgNnsy6U3lp87lYQgPXT6Z03R+3+SdZP4ROIqocCP1mpgQNz5nKPnC3r 7C2nSJtj8k8RrmccdrA4rWY/k0YFz0YydDj5Kjthoxb5GDYJ8qh0P20p18/YtHIh+Zxe uODv6mvH44aO6kR2wzBhTlnwNvrFVr5n2Gk0ZMBbZA9/eel8KILW44wTlU0BYox7k+Xa 40JMFQjFs7NYYYREDuJvRYrrQnxJxe4KSWefds8gezTPJz9Zw1iU6tklfezI4ZEkGmCJ 9aCCBevIdg1xH7sgkvu/qBVUOvqb2E90t+oV0q3bN7qM1YNdPZRve++xrftMLCXuoVbi WzQQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.58.12.231 with SMTP id b7mr9203060vec.28.1344857105864; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 04:25:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.62.77 with HTTP; Mon, 13 Aug 2012 04:25:05 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CADnDZ8-nezaNodqvmdB-HtMPqxL_2kuVng9NTqKhHkrDA2XXhw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADnDZ8-nezaNodqvmdB-HtMPqxL_2kuVng9NTqKhHkrDA2XXhw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 13:25:05 +0200
Message-ID: <CADnDZ8_k4qyCYVU1PmuWKOnN6GGY6OVwvAYKGeC_kC92CEwM_A@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [IAB] Last Call: Modern Global Standards Paradigm
From: Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: ietf <ietf@ietf.org>
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: Mon, 13 Aug 2012 11:25:07 -0000

Hi Dave,

I agree that procedure of ietf processes should be respected and
followed by all, and/or community should understand such difference in
process before asked its opinion. I hope your comments will be
considered by IETF and IAB in the future.

thanking you for your comments,

AB
 --------------------------------------------------

 From: Dave Crocker <dcrocker at bbiw.net>
 To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba at computer.org>
 Cc: IAB <iab at iab.org>, IETF <ietf at ietf.org>
 Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 08:50:10 -0700

> Two weeks is normal process for spontaneous consensus calls?
>
> When did the community approve that change in process?
>
> No he didn't:
>
>      "Please send strong objections..."
>
> This asserts a forceful bias against general comments and criticisms by
> establishing a very high threshhold for relevance.  While no, no one is
> prevented from other kinds of postings, the bias is nonetheless
> established.
>
> Note that he didn't ask for support, although explicit support
> statements are exactly what is required for IETF consensus calls, absent
>
> a history to justify the kind of "default yes" assumption made in the
> announcement. We don't have any such documented history for this
> effort.
> Would any of us guess that the community would support the document?
> Sure.  But guessing isn't the point.
>
>
> That folks have chosen to ignore the stricture specified in the
> announcement and to post public support shows how deeply ingrained our
> model is. And, yeah, enough such postings overwhelm problems with the
> last call wording...
>
> d/
>
> --
>  Dave Crocker
>  Brandenburg InternetWorking
>  bbiw.net
>