Re: Rough consensus? #425 3.5

["JFC (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey at jefsey.com>]

At 00:21 20/01/2005, Leslie Daigle wrote:
> Interesting...
> To the extent that the IAD and IAOC are dealing with
> decisions about implementing requirements, I agree.


> To the extent that the IAD and IAOC are applying judgement
> to interpret the "best needs of the IETF" (i.e., determining
> those requirements), I disagree.  I think it's a little
> heavy-handed to have to instigate a recall procedure if the
> IAD (or IAOC) seem not to have heard the *community's* requirements
> for meeting location.
>
> So, (how) can we make the distinction without creating a
> decision tree of epic proportions?

Just say that they are to consult the IETF when they do not feel sure about 
the "best needs of the IETF". A recall procedure would probably not be 
called the first time, even if the issue is important (preserving 
stability), but can be called even on a small issue if they repeatedly do 
not consult the IETF when a disagreement/uncertainity is obvious.

So, the recall procedure is not on a possibly disputed case - the dispute 
would harm the whole IETF - but on a repeated Management poor practice 
where accumulated displeasure will probably make the case less disputed. It 
also permits IETF to vote warnings.

jfc


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf