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

[Brian E Carpenter <[e-mail]>]

Comment below...


On 07-Jan-22 01:30, Eliot Lear wrote:
> 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.

Yes, that scopes it correctly. For example, if a change unintentionally
required the LLC or its contractor to break GDPR or any other law, or
overspend its budget, this would catch it.

    Brian


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