 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On 04/20/2007 08:35 AM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:It seems fairly clear in RFC 2418 section 6.1:
"The Chair has the responsibility and the authority to make decisions, on behalf of the working group, regarding all matters of working group process and staffing, in conformance with the rules of the IETF. The AD has the authority and the responsibility to assist in making those decisions at the request of the Chair or when circumstances warrant such an intervention."
So the AD *does* have authority *when circumstances warrant*, but only on matters of process and staffing. I'm sure Jeff Schiller didn't mean any more than that - this rule doesn't allow an AD to take technical decisions unilaterally, but does allow an AD to make a consensus call if for some reason the WG Chairs can't do so. (And all subject to the regular appeal process, of course.)
My recollection is that Jeff made a technical decision and announced it, because everyone agreed the process was deadlocked. I don't recall that he ever "took over" for a WG chair, but there was agreement that the WG was stuck and a decision was required.
Ah, but if the WG *agrees* to accept the AD's decision, that's OK. The rules in 2418 certainly allow an AD to ask a stuck WG "Will you let me decide?". That's very different from deciding unilaterally.
Sorry to be picky but I think this distinction matters.
Brian
_______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf at ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.