Re: Should the IESG rule or not? and all that...

[Brian E Carpenter <brc at zurich.ibm.com>]

Keith Moore wrote:
> > Keith,
> >
> > The IESG can still exercise their best engineering judgment as
> > individuals, as the rest of us do.
> >
> > The IESG role itself need not incorporate a privileged position from
> > which to wield that judgement. There's plenty left to do.
>
> Joe,
>
> The IESG has several duties that are defined in RFC 2026 and other 
> documents.  These duties include using engineering judgment to determine 
> whether documents meet criteria for standards track, or whether to bless 
> certain kinds of protocol extensions.   All this notion of "privilege" 
> misses the point - which is that we cannot ensure document or protocol 
> quality without having some set of people decide whether or not a 
> proposal is good enough.
>
> If IESG people were to personally benefit from their exercise of this 
> "privilege" you'd have a valid gripe.  But I don't recall ever seeing 
> this happen.  If it does happen, I don't think it happens very often.

That's why the IESG ballot process has a 'recuse' option. It would be
legitimate for the community to ask why a particular AD had not recuse
him/herself in a specific case, but it's entirely clear that in general
the IESG is expected and required to make technical judgements.

   Brian


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