On 19:22 05/05/2005, Joe Touch said:
> The set of people disagreeing with ADs include both technically astute
people
> and egocentric fools.
Ditto for the ADs themselves.
Has this a real importance? The control is by IETF as a whole, _if_ rough
consensus is the rule. What is expected from ADs is to make sure that what
is proposed meets a rough consensus. This could possibly include commenting
their concerns before the Last Call if they feel it necessary. This may
include their advise. They should however _never_ consider anything else
than consensus. If they have other concerns they should join the WG.
Technically astute people and egocentric fools are usually both out of
consensus.
The only thing expected from IETF as a whole is a permanent consensus never
to prevent technically astute fools' solutions from developing outside of
the IETF until they may be understood and possibly accepted by its members
as part of their consensus. This is why, the IANA registry and Best New
Practice question is so important.
May be a solution would be to consider an Internet Innovation Task Force to
serve as an astute fool's test bed. The rule there would not be consensus
but the most astute solution, by participant votes. If you consider Source
Forge, it works de facto in this way.
jfc
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf