IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [mpowr] Re: Getting Bad Ideas to Fail Early

John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Tue, 10 February 2004 17:17 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org (optimus.ietf.org [132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA28176 for <mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:17:29 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqbVN-0007pO-I1 for mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:17:01 -0500
Received: (from exim@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.12.8/8.12.8/Submit) id i1AHH1Pk030087 for mpowr-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:17:01 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqbVN-0007pC-9Z for mpowr-web-archive@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:17:01 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA28047 for <mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:16:58 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqbVL-0006tO-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:17:00 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqbUM-0006jF-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:15:59 -0500
Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqbTR-0006dN-00 for mpowr-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:15:01 -0500
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqbTR-0007mZ-H2; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:15:01 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AqbTN-0007m4-Tq for mpowr@optimus.ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:14:57 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA27989 for <mpowr@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:14:54 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqbTM-0006ci-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:14:56 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AqbST-0006Xo-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:14:01 -0500
Received: from ns.jck.com ([209.187.148.211] helo=bs.jck.com) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AqbS6-0006Sr-00 for mpowr@ietf.org; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:13:38 -0500
Received: from [209.187.148.215] (helo=scan.jck.com) by bs.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 1AqbS5-000Kje-00; Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:13:37 -0500
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2004 12:13:37 -0500
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, David.Partain@ericsson.com, mpowr@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [mpowr] Re: Getting Bad Ideas to Fail Early
Message-ID: <136684602.1076415217@scan.jck.com>
In-Reply-To: <2480163516.1076368370@localhost>
References: <2480163516.1076368370@localhost>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.1.0 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: mpowr-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: mpowr-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: mpowr@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr>, <mailto:mpowr-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Management Positions -- Oversight, Work and Results <mpowr.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:mpowr@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mpowr-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpowr>, <mailto:mpowr-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL autolearn=no version=2.60
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


--On Monday, 09 February, 2004 23:12 -0800 Harald Tveit 
Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote:

>
>
> --On 30. januar 2004 12:31 +0100 "David Partain (LI/EAB)"
> <david.partain@ericsson.com> wrote:
>
>>> > What do we do if the WG refuses to acknowledge that an
>>> > idea is "bad" and forges ahead?
>>>
>>> Wait for IESG to decide. It would be nice to design some
>>> procedure for IESG to decide sooner (early) rather than at
>>> PS stage.
>>
>> Might be a very good idea, but at the risk of making them
>> interrupt driven, which I personally find to be a hard way
>> to work.
>
> that would be no change ... the IESG document evaluation
> process is currently highly interrupt driven - the interrupt
> is the other ADs putting documents on the agenda.....

Different answer, complementary to Harald's.  If the AD 
responsible for a particular WG concludes that the WG is 
promoting "bad" ideas and can't get unstuck from them, has a 
very wide range of mechanisms available for focusing the WG's 
attention.  We can discuss how these should be exercised, what 
degree of consultation should be required and with whom, etc., 
but the basic mechanisms remain.  They include:

	* Additional, forceful, explanations of why the idea is
	bad and isn't going anywhere. ("reading of the riot act"
	is probably a member of this category)
	
	* Replacing WG Chairs
	
	* Rechartering the WG to eliminate the task(s) that the
	WG doesn't want to get right.
	
	* Closing the WG entirely.

With the possible exception of the third (I can't think of an 
example at the moment) each of these has been used, at one time 
or another, in the past.  They are not new, and do not require 
procedural changes.

    john




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

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email