On Thu, 16 Jun 2005, wayne wrote:
William:
I am certainly no expert on how the IETF/IESG works and I'll be the
first to admit that I'm as confused as heck about all this.
That said, I am not sure that your calculations are correct.
First off, why did you delete off the voting line for Harald
Alvestrand? If his vote doesn't count, why would he have a voting
line? (The SPF voting is similar, only there are two extra people
with voting lines.)
He's no longer IETF Chair so his vote would not count. If you look at the
tracker you'll see his name below everyone else separated by blank line -
that is to indicate what his vote as separate from the rest of the active
ADs (its left their for informational purposes only).
I'm not sure that you sould take the "ADs" part too literally, because
Brian Carpenter is not an AD.
I know. Nevertheless his vote is counted in the same way.
Secondly, I don't think "abstain" is the same as "recused".
"Abstain" is about the closest you can come to a "no" vote on the IESG
balleting.
"no" is not used with IESG (normally)
To be honest I do not know for sure but I speculated based on some notes
when AD says that "he does not want to say in the way of the document"
that this is a way to get around and its counted similar to "recused" but
I'm not 100% certain.
If above is not so, then SID is in trouble with two more ADs switching
their discuss to abstain (remember just few days ago Ted Hardie said that
all discuss would be cleared - if that is how they were cleared...)
I do know that shepherding AD can request a vote during telechat and then
whoever has not voted must tell something.
The following URL seems to give as complete an explanation as I have
seen on the voting:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/pidtracker.cgi?command=view_evaluation_desc
Interestig, I actually have not read this! If I follow that, it means
that 2 more votes are needed in addition to Ted's yes for SPF and 3 more
for SID. Because number of ADs who have noted voted for SID is smaller
and they are not in application, security or related area, they are more
likely to vote "abstain" and so I do not see SID drafts winning on the
live telechat vote in current situation. SPF on the other hand probably
can win if its brought to the vote and shepherding AD's vote is yes.
And I'm sure you know my opinion that the problem is that shepherding AD
does not want in this situation to bring SPF to the vote - there is
obviously conflict of interest there which keeps SPF RFC publication
delayed and I think SPF Council might consider what options it has as
as to who it wants to sponsor its draft going forward or if its needed
at all (you can try to send next draft version directly to RFC Editor for
experimental individual publication separate from MARID documents -
since MARID is closed and no other WG is looking at this there should be
no conflict, although I suspect Ted Hardie will argue otherwise).
Oh, and thank you very much for all the help you have been with SPF,
especially in regards to explaining how the IETF works and such. I
greatly appreciate it, and I'm sure others do too.
I'm not big expert either. I'm learning as it goes along with you and
rest of spf people who are involved.
--
William Leibzon
Elan Networks
william(_at_)elan(_dot_)net