[Top] [All Lists]

Re: On revising 3777 as in draft-klensin-recall-rev-00

2005-11-16 09:34:08
I am not convinced that we need to do any change in this
area. First, I think we have higher priority items to worry
about. The IETF really needs to spend its process change
cycles on things that provide a measureable effect and that
has a real impact on timeliness/quality/openess/your favorite

And we've never had a recall so optimizing process
for it is premature. Lets wait until we have recalls
and then tune the parameters.

I do believe that if the IESG or IAB has a problem working
together then we should hear about it as soon as possible.
But nothing prevents open discussion, including participation
of IESG members. If the only people who can be convinced
to sign a recall petition can be found in the IESG and IAB,
well, maybe we don't have a problem after all.

Finally, I'm not sure I am comfortable with the idea that
the IESG and IAB (altogether over 20 persons) could
all by itself sign a petion and get it processed. This would
appear to provide a channel to oppose decisions from the
nomcom, for instance.

If there's ever an issue that deserves recall-level discussion,
lets hear about that, publicly, and get enough people behind
it to sign the petition. If you can't get it done, maybe the
issue was not all that convincing to people.


Ietf mailing list

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