Re: Adminrest: section 3.5

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

 



Scott Bradner wrote:
draft-ietf-iasa-bcp-01 section 3.5 says
   The IAOC attempts to reach all decisions unanimously.  If unanimity
   cannot be achieved, the IAOC chair may conduct informal polls to
   determine the consensus of the group.  In cases where it is
   necessary, some decisions may be made by voting.  For the purpose of
   judging consensus or voting, only the "voting members" (as defined in
   Section 4) shall be counted.  If voting results in a tie, then IAOC
   chair decides how to proceed with the decision process.

      Editors' note: The above text was changed from the previous
      version.  Are the voting rules in the preceding paragraph
      sufficient?  Do we need to define rules for determining a quorum?

I would not define a quorum because I would hope that this work would not
require face to face or conference call meetings - I'd just say that
the vote takes place among the current members of the IAOC.

but as I said before - I expect we will be close to failure if the IAD proceeds on the basis of a close vote in the IAOC. I'd rather that
mininum vote required to proceed (in those cases where a vote is
needed because of disagreement) be a majority plus one

While I agree with the principle of seeking consensus, in a small committee like this requiring a supermajority is tricky. So I'd be inclined to leave it as is, but I wouldn't go to war over it.

   Brian

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

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