Re: [mpowr] Mailing List Management

No one asked my opinion, of course, but when I read Margaret's last
paragraph, I did wonder why we don't assume that the working group
will produce useful specifications in a timely fashion, and then
manage by exception for working groups that don't.

If it was the IESG's role to make sure that the bottom twenty percent
of our documents never see the light of day as RFCs, ADs would have
more time to figure out which documents needed to be blocked.

Spencer

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <Margaret.Wasserman@nokia.com>
To: <john-ietf@jck.com>om>; <harald@alvestrand.no>no>; <mpowr@ietf.org>
Sent: Tuesday, December 23, 2003 6:18 PM
Subject: RE: [mpowr] Mailing List Management

[deleted down to]

I know that you have your personal pet peeves about our
current process, and I have mine.  For example, I still
think that the default action should be approval of WG
documents, and that it should take consensus (or at least
a majority) of the IESG to block a document.  But, I am
not sure that view is in the majority in any segment of
the IETF, and I certainly don't think that we have consensus
that such a change would be beneficial.

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