Hi David,
Thank you for sharing this information. Now that the community knows
this, perhaps this will be an option when there are snags in the process
in future.
regards,
Lakshminath
On 6/17/2008 6:02 AM, David Kessens wrote:
Lakshminath,
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 11:01:17PM -0700, Lakshminath Dondeti wrote:
I have also been disappointed by the IESG not once invoking the override
procedures even when a DISCUSS is clearly inappropriate.
For the record, during my time in the IESG, we have had at least two
cases where override procedures were requested. One vote was requested
by me to clear a document that I was the shepherd for that got stuck
in the IESG for a very long period and where the DISCUSSing AD was not
responsive while trying to resolve a DISCUSS.
In another case, I asked the shepherding AD to request an override vote
as I had fundamental issues with a document that was not likely to be
resolved in a timely matter due to the nature of my problems with the
document. Therefore, instead of me holding a DISCUSS forever and
leaving the document in limbo, I proposed that an override vote could
help us to force a decision early.
If my memory serves me correctly, we didn't have to do a formal
override vote in both cases as the request of an override vote was
enough to get the first case moving, while in the second case I
decided that an informal strawpoll was enough to decide that I didn't
have enough support for my opinion so I switched to an ABSTAIN.
David Kessens
---
_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf