ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 1601bis -03: Still Vague

2000-03-03 21:40:03
Hello:

First of all, it is not over until the RFC-Editor sings :^.

Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote:

The role descriptions of section 2 remains vague. Thus, the relation
with IANA and the RFC Editor will remain vague.

It seems quite clear to me. You might want to suggest alternative wording
that you think is clearer.

It is not about wordsmithing, but more about the fundamentals of
section 2. Sub-section 2.1 is about "architectural oversight in 
more detail". However, it is not clear on how to measure the 
effectiveness of that sub-section. Thus, it will be not so easy 
for a NomCom member to evaluate the performance of the IAB. 
The only clue is perhaps the IAB's long queue of work-in-progress. 
For example, 1601bis has been more than 4 years in queue. Therefore, 
the nature of revising 1601bis must not be easy. Nonetheless, there 
will be no organizational improvement until the IAB is willing 
continuously to improve itself. See also "Managing The Non-Profit 
Organization -- Practices and Principles" (Peter F. Drucker, 1990)
for more details.

  "The RFC Editor is chartered by the Internet Society (ISOC)
   and the Federal Network Council (FNC)"

That might have been true at one point, and things have changed. 
What's the problem with that?

Not much, just $1,295,517

regards,

-- 
- Rahmat M. Samik-Ibrahim --  VLSM-TJT --  http://rms46.vlsm.org/ -
Here we are,poised on the precipice of suicide slope-Calvin 20Feb89



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>