[Top] [All Lists]

Re: IONs & discuss criteria

2008-03-06 18:07:49

A small clarification below on the reference to the interpretation 
problems related to 3777:

On 3/6/2008 4:10 PM, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

On 2008-03-07 12:34, Dave Crocker wrote:
Sam Hartman wrote:
Making it a BCP will make the interpretation problem worse not better.


To some extent that depends on how carefully the putative BCP
is crafted, with "should" and when to disregard "should" being
very precise. What I think we've seen, with 2026 over the years,
and apparently this year with 3777, is that it's virtually

I am not sure whether you have made it to the appendix in my report, but 
the disagreements in interpretation of 3777 have a history (see Page 
37).  The only thing special about the current nomcom is that we chose 
to bring it to the community's attention.  In Ralph's case, he brought 
it to the IESG and IAB's attention in March 2006.

Nomcom 2007-8 Chair

impossible to write precise procedural text that deals with
completely unexpected circumstances. Yet if the text has the
force of a BCP, it becomes very hard to interpret it flexibly
when flexibility is clearly needed.  I don't know if that
is Sam's point, of course.

IETF mailing list

IETF mailing list

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