Re: DT members say "no"

John C Klensin <KLENSIN@infoods.mit.edu> Wed, 02 December 1992 19:17 UTC

Date: Wed, 02 Dec 1992 14:16:29 -0500
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: John C Klensin <KLENSIN@infoods.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: DT members say "no"
In-reply-to: <9212021931.AA13840@xap.xyplex.com>
To: rlstewart@eng.xyplex.com
Cc: poised@CNRI.Reston.VA.US
Message-id: <723323789.912040.KLENSIN@INFOODS.UNU.EDU>
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET="US-ASCII"
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Mail-System-Version: <MultiNet-MM(330)+TOPSLIB(156)+PMDF(4.1)@INFOODS.UNU.EDU>

>There's a simple solution to this problem.  Careful discussion followed by
>humming/show of hands/whatever, at the WG meeting.  If the change is hummed
>in after detailed debate, then that's it.  If the problem is that the DT
>...
>That's exactly what we've been doing in SNMPv2.  We still get the occasional
>accusation of cronyism and railroading, not to mention issues that keep
>returning and returning and returning.  Certain types of favorite solutions

It does, however, mean that, in addition to the process being biased
toward those who have worked long and hard and ..., it is also biased
toward those who attend meetings.  In addition, it means that some
(perhaps "many" or "most") controversies between design teams and other
WG members (or between sets of design teams) have to wait for WG
meetings to resolve, while may imply unreasonable delay.

I, at least, have been quite unsuccessful at measuring considered WG
reactions but putting my ear to the screen and listening for humming
noises.
   john

DT members say "no" Craig Partridge
DT members say "no" Bob Stewart
Re: DT members say "no" John C Klensin
Re: DT members say "no" Bob Stewart