[Rfced-future] Issue 134: Re: How can this process be changed?

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

We didn't quite close on this issue.  There are three candidates:

Mark's text:

> Updates, amendments and refinements of this document can be produced 
> using the process documented here, but are only operative upon 
> agreement of the IAB, the IESG, and the IETF LLC. Note that this does 
> not preclude such changes from being defined outside this process, so 
> long as the same agreement is found.

Mark's 2nd sentence provides a backstop to address any process failures 
that could happen either in the RSWG or RSAB.  This specifically 
addresses an issue that Mike raised at one point.

Mirja's text:

> "Updates, amendments and refinements of this document require 
> agreement of the IAB, the IESG, and the IETF LLC."

And Brian's text:

> Updates, amendments and refinements of this document can be produced 
> using the process documented here, but are only operative upon 
> agreement of the IAB, the IESG, and the IETF LLC
> with regard to matters falling under their respective remits.

Brian's text came about as part of a discussion as to whether the LLC 
should have an approval role here.

I am a little unsure as to how that would be implemented.   How would 
you as an IAB/IESG/LLC member interpret that sentence? Could a NO vote 
be appealable as to whether something is outside a remit of an org?  How 
about a YES vote?  Could that be appealable?  And how would one know why 
someone is voting as they do?

It may be helpful to restate Brian's text as follows:

> Updates, amendments and refinements of this document can be produced 
> using the process documented here, but are only operative upon 
> agreement of the IAB and the IESG, and with no objections from the LLC 
> with regard to their ability to implement any proposed change.

The analogy here might be that of an IANA considerations section, where 
IANA reviews and clears a document.

?

Eliot