Re: Community Collaboration, versus Central Management

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Dave,

[clipped...]

> A critical danger in central management is an inherent fragility in
> decision-making.  Real diversity is lost. This becomes even more
> serious, as the central management becomes more homogeneous and more
> isolated.

On the subject of central management, quoting from the IESG Plenary on 
Wednesday:

    IESG Plenary/Open Mike
    
    Q: Two questions for both IAB and IESG - individual participation and
    consensus - are these still important? alternative is participation by
    companies or governments, and voting...  - we believe in these values
    up to point, at which point the IESG makes a decision - Harald
    semi-agrees that sometimes a decision is needed and the IESG makes 
    one, but does not agree that IESG can impose its will against a
    working group - but does IESG try to get community consensus when it
    makes a decision?

So it seems that the IETF traditional motto, "rough consensus and
working code" should be revised to make it clear that the "rough
consensus" goes only up to a certain point, but after that point
the IETF operates solely by a decree from the IESG.

Yakov.


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]