Re: [Rfced-future] Comments on draft-iab-rfcefdp-rfced-model

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

On 10.03.22 16:37, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 11:10 PM Eliot Lear <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>     The philosophy behind CONCERNs is that they should be rare, and
>     that the
>     community really should be taking responsibility for the content of a
>     document.  Thus, unless something truly rises to a threat to a
>     stream or
>     the long term health of the series, the RSAB should stay out of the
>     way.  Those two CONCERN criteria are sufficiently broad to permit
>     members to act if the policy truly looks like it will cause harm
>     in some
>     way.
>
>
> If we are to think of the RSWG as a typical working group (which the 
> document otherwise suggests is how we should think of it), then I 
> can't discount the possibility that something might be handed to the 
> RSAB that is not really ready for consideration, for whatever reason.  
> As I read what you're saying here, this proposal presumes that can't 
> (or won't) happen.

I think the way to look at it is risk-based, and that authority is 
balanced such that the risks of authority abuse by the RSAB are 
prioritized certain classes of errors made by the community.

Eliot


> I'm thinking defensively here; what do we do when it does happen?  It 
> seems to me the RSAB needs a path to deal with such a situation, and 
> they don't with "CONCERN" constrained the way it is here.
>
> -MSK