ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: RFC 2434 term "IESG approval" (Re: IANA Action: Assignment of an IPV6 Hop-by-hop Option)

2005-06-29 13:12:15

we need to allow IESG to use some discretion here.

what *kind* of discretion?

      should we allow the IESG the discretion to decide what they like or 
don't like and then allow them the authority to make the decision based on 
that?

IESG should have discretion to evaluate such proposals for soundness,
along with supporting material and community comments, and make a
decision.  And if people disagree with that decision, that's what
appeals are for. 

      or, should we allow the IESG the discretion to note potential issues 
and 
then allow them the authority to raise seek review and consensus from the 
IETF?

No.  _Someone_ has to decide whether a proposal has sufficient merit to
approve it, and whether any technical or process concerns raised are
sufficiently valid to deny the proposal or to request that it be
revised.  Of course, that someone can be capricious, and that's
unfortunate.  But taking IESG out of the loop doesn't solve that
problem, it only moves it. 

And it's probably worth pointing out that both individuals and working 
groups can be at least as capricious, and incorrect, as IESG can.
Your effort to make IESG seem capricious by using words like "what they
like or don't like" applies at least as much to other parties as it
does to IESG.

Keith


_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf



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