No, that's not what I said. I said that the proto shepherd is
responsible for sending the comment to the appropriate place.
As I said, that's been standard practise forever. It's been done by the
cognizant AD and proto is proposing it be done by someone else, but the task
is not changed.
If the
add holding the discuss wants to send it to the mailing listthat's
fine. If the working group wants to send mail to the AD that's fine
too.
More than one of us has tried to describe the nature of the problem and its
solution yet we seem not to be heard.
Let me try the simplest summary possible:
If someone has the authority to block the long-term work of a group of IETF
participants, they have an *obligation* to take their concerns directly to
those participants and engage in a direct process to resolve it.
Authority always comes with responsibility. In this case it should simply be
that the authority to block a group has a responsibility to interact with that
group.
Directly.
d/
---
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
+1.408.246.8253
dcrocker a t ...
WE'VE MOVED to: www.bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf