Re: Failing to convince an IETF WG
Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com> Wed, 26 September 2012 08:15 UTC
Return-Path: <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7FD621F8668 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 01:15:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.229
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.229 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.230, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, SARE_BAYES_5x7=0.6]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id w2UAum1YZKDe for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 01:15:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vb0-f44.google.com (mail-vb0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1796A21F87A5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 01:15:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vbbfc26 with SMTP id fc26so366822vbb.31 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 01:15:31 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=MDlX7wWo6jVEGjLENpSYUlmSYkXYzqKMV3XWcxgHwIc=; b=JFuhDx7nQXoawrch6XeXocTfkbq6KzoXAPZq09vf393SehBCyVNSymuwvqYlqKLT6w Gozo0vwdlw93bqTRCSoxgFgCHMPgK2nb6pnfHR9GhfccurCnTAxYhwXBiArF1PWrQBYB 2iyoGcdDj0pZr8BEbX9vCo/O75arbwrjjTrD7FsR2J1Dco2XO74Kjeb3YltvkS39TKhm fCx18ZePkZPj8zo+9ZbDpVhpFIR5pjbKBJvSl6i/YMmlXFL95txUOx1Oz5iq/xS4LvZJ saL1gFL8dmu2LJA+cjXyl12fij+NPSwPEjKYJ2+5//sl582HQXlPInGNJkglL1t1bSRV IPDg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.58.13.33 with SMTP id e1mr10627312vec.51.1348647331554; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 01:15:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.220.2.83 with HTTP; Wed, 26 Sep 2012 01:15:31 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CADnDZ8-FCKnpVhVRjVnOSfr-iA9MSgvXuTJvHk4MUxhNKCnW2A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CADnDZ8-K71TT2UuufyTLy-vgTjnnNqxo3X-_xbeoFRRYK9mH1A@mail.gmail.com> <CADnDZ8-FCKnpVhVRjVnOSfr-iA9MSgvXuTJvHk4MUxhNKCnW2A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 10:15:31 +0200
Message-ID: <CADnDZ88RaO5iWccJLXmjLNyhRFLsegxcpEyZJ3RTBWegfJdUQw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Failing to convince an IETF WG
From: Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@gmail.com>
To: tglassey@earthlink.net
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: ietf <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2012 08:15:33 -0000
Hi Todd, I agree on your concerns but disagree with few issues, read my disagree reason below: Todd> Most of the vetting happens between parties offlist and no capture ..... AB> any organisation may have this behavior, but what matters is as long as you are participating to : monitoring input, questioning, suggesting, convincing others, writing I-Ds for the IETF, and making up your decisions. Todd>The IETF process of today is based on a 'consensus' process from a membership of zero. That in and of itself flies in the face of reason and ethical clarity. If there were formal members who came together in a framework that the IETF administered it would be OK but the process today is too easily abused. AB> it is greate that we are not memebrs, we are participants, because we become equal to any other, if memebrship then we will have a memebr for 10 years and a memeber for 5 years (not measuring efforts but time), but with the IETF we are just participants, the value or difference between us is only how much you participate and author I-Ds or IETF RFCs. There MAY be abuse to the consensus process only if the CHAIR does not consider the healthy discussion related. So we need something to avoid this. Todd> When the journey is completed the standard will automatically issue... no IESG no IAB pain no extra administrative overhead for a bunch of lifer type standards junkies... Just simple and clean access to the standard process. AB> standard process is greate as we have IESG and WG reviews, first because the authors will have to discuss through many things with the focused/expert IETF group, then secondly the IESG have a more general review which includes many other affects of the I-D with other WGs in IETF. Yes painful but healthy. Best Regards Abdussalam Baryun ++++++++++++++++ The mission of the Internet Engineering Task Force is to make the Internet work better by producing high-quality and relevant technical documents that influence the way people design, use, and manage the Internet. See http://www.ietf.org.
- Re: Failing to convince an IETF WG Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: Failing to convince an IETF WG Abdussalam Baryun
- Re: Failing to convince an IETF WG Rémi Després