RE: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process]
2006-09-19 11:30:26
For what it is worth my takehome from the Montreal meeting was that there was
genuine desire for change but no recognition of consensus on a particular way
forward.
One of the reasons that there is no recognition of consensus on a way forward
is that we did not learn the nature of the objections from the IESG or even who
was making it. In other words precisely the type of opaque decision making
processes that were being criticized.
It is a FACT that the IETF produces a minute number of actual 100% standards
each year. You are the one indulging in handwaving here, not me.
It is a FACT that when I am asked to propose venues for standards activities
the IETF is currently a much harder sell than it should be.
Stop trying to shoot the messenger here. I want to be in a position where I can
suggest bringing work to the IETF in a pre-standards multi-party meeting and
not having people laugh or groan.
I certainly do not recommend IETF in all circumstances, nor do I recommend
against IETF in every case. My problem is that I cannot recommend IETF in as
many situations as I would like.
The two principle issues being the lack of standards recognition (pushback:
can't we just do an informational RFC) and the large dose of Not Invented Here.
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brc(_at_)zurich(_dot_)ibm(_dot_)com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 19, 2006 11:34 AM
To: Eliot Lear
Cc: ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about
mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process]
Eliot Lear wrote:
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
We could argue this interminably or you could simply grasp
the nettle
and align theory with reality.
It was clear in Montreal that there is no community
consensus to spend
effort on doing this, so we have closed down this avenue for now.
I'm sorry, Brian, but this answer is truly unacceptable.
Reality is
that our 3 step process is not functioning as documented.
We thought
we were fixing it in NEWTRK, but you shut down that group. Please
tell me and the rest of the community what path you expect
to correct
the error. If you don't have a proposal I will have one of my own.
I'm not sure that I can say it more clearly than I did the first time.
I do not believe there is enough interest in this problem in
the community to invest effort in fixing it. That is quite
distinct from whether you, I or a number of other individuals
believe it needs fixing.
I think you weren't in Montreal. You might want to check the
plenary minutes at
http://www3.ietf.org/proceedings/06jul/plenaryw.html
or listen to the audio at
ftp://limestone.uoregon.edu/pub/videolab/media/ietf66/ietf66-c
h5-wed-plenary.mp3
If you can build a strong constituency for a given proposal,
that might change things. But over the last few years, I
haven't seen more than a few people supporting any given
proposal, including ones that I've made, and that doesn't cut
it for something that affects every single WG.
Brian
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread>
|
- Re: security features.... (Re: Facts, please), (continued)
Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Brian E Carpenter
RE: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process],
Hallam-Baker, Phillip <=
- Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Eliot Lear
- Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Eliot Lear
- Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Brian E Carpenter
- Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Eliot Lear
- Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Sam Hartman
Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Spencer Dawkins
Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Scott Bradner
|
Previous by Date: |
RE: security features.... (Re: Facts, please), Hallam-Baker, Phillip |
Next by Date: |
Re: security features.... (Re: Facts, please), Harald Alvestrand |
Previous by Thread: |
Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Brian E Carpenter |
Next by Thread: |
Re: Facts, please, not handwaving [Re: Its about mandate RE: Why cant the IETF embrace an open Election Process], Brian E Carpenter |
Indexes: |
[Date]
[Thread]
[Top]
[All Lists] |
|
|