Re: IONs & discuss criteria

[Lakshminath Dondeti <ldondeti at qualcomm.com>]

Brian,

A small clarification below on the reference to the interpretation 
problems related to 3777:

On 3/6/2008 4:10 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Dave,
> 
> On 2008-03-07 12:34, Dave Crocker wrote:
>> Sam Hartman wrote:
>>> Making it a BCP will make the interpretation problem worse not better.
>>
>> How?
> 
> To some extent that depends on how carefully the putative BCP
> is crafted, with "should" and when to disregard "should" being
> very precise. What I think we've seen, with 2026 over the years,
> and apparently this year with 3777, is that it's virtually

I am not sure whether you have made it to the appendix in my report, but 
the disagreements in interpretation of 3777 have a history (see Page 
37).  The only thing special about the current nomcom is that we chose 
to bring it to the community's attention.  In Ralph's case, he brought 
it to the IESG and IAB's attention in March 2006.

thanks,
Lakshminath
Nomcom 2007-8 Chair

> impossible to write precise procedural text that deals with
> completely unexpected circumstances. Yet if the text has the
> force of a BCP, it becomes very hard to interpret it flexibly
> when flexibility is clearly needed.  I don't know if that
> is Sam's point, of course.
> 
>     Brian
> _______________________________________________
> IETF mailing list
> IETF at ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
> 
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF at ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf