Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCWeb

[Roger Jørgensen <[e-mail]>]

On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Eliot Lear <[e-mail]> wrote:
> While I appreciate the difficult position the chairs are in, I don't
> agree with the approach and I believe it is inappropriate for the
> working group to make such a decision.  Working groups don't vote.  Want
> to change that process?  Better gain IETF consensus first.  And I will
> argue against any such attempt.  There are plenty of other standards
> bodies that do vote.  Go to one of them if that's what you want.

Have to agree on this, no voting.

And if the problem is that bad, that it's impossible to reach
consensus in the WG, what about replacing the chairs? ...



--- Roger J ---

> Eliot
>
> On 11/28/13 2:35 PM, Hervé wrote:
>> Dave Cridland wrote:
>>
>>> 2) If the Working Group does want to mandate a single codec, is there
>> consensus for one of the alternate decision-making processes described
>> in RFC 3929? This is our best guess at what to do here; despite it being
>>  a (presumably expired) Experimental track RFC.
>>
>>
>> RFC 3929 has been mentioned on the rtcweb mailinglist and during the last meeting.
>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/maillist.html
>> http://ietf88.conf.meetecho.com/index.php/Recorded_Sessions#RTCWEB_II
>>
>>
>>> If nobody else appeals the decision, then I will - assuming I'm allowed to - if it gets this far.
>>> it's not clear to me that there is a consensus surrounding the voting
>> rules - they've certainly yet to be summarised in one place based on the
>>  discussion that has occurred so far.
>>
>> No decision yet. Per
>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg09909.html today
>> is the last planned day for comment/discussion on the _proposal_ to vote,
>> before the proposal gets updated. A further call for consensus to use
>> the proposal would follow after updating.
>> Perhaps you'd like to get involved now rather than later.
>>
>>
>> Here's what I sent to someone else regarding the proposed schedule:
>> Nov 28          last day of comment/discussion period on proposed _voting process_ http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg09909.html
>>
>> after Nov 28    WG chairs will update, if necessary, the process proposal
>> after update    normal IETF process to reach consensus about adopting the (updated) process proposal
>>
>> +2 weeks        last day of the consensus call about adopting the voting process
>>
>>
>> IF consensus was reached to use the voting process in those 2 weeks after the update for that process, ONLY THEN would the (2 week) voting period start (if that wasn't changed in the update/concensus call).
>>
>> So the voting process can theoretically _start_ Dec 13 at the earliest, if accepted. Probably later (if ever), given that updating the proposal is unlikely to be instantaneous.
>>
>>
>> I hope that made it clearer. The source for this is the bottom section of http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg09909.html
>>
>>
>> - Hervé
>>
>



-- 

Roger Jorgensen           | ROJO9-RIPE
[e-mail]          | - IPv6 is The Key!
http://www.jorgensen.no   | [e-mail]