Leslie,
I think this is a huge improvement, and a large step in the
right direction. Two observations:
(i) In the revised 3.5, it would be good to get a slightly
better handle/ definition on what is, or is not, a "business
decision". Since the IAD and IAOC are ultimately all about
business decisions (and management decisions that are arguably a
subset of management decisions), an IAOC acting in poor faith
could easily argue that any decision fell within that category.
I'd consider saying "contractual or personnel decisions", but
don't know if that is sufficient. _However_, in practice, if we
couldn't find satisfactory text, it probably don't make much
difference: an IAOC that resorts to that sort of hair-splitting
would probably need a much more drastic course correction than
any quibbling about the text of the BCP would provide.
(ii) In deference to one of the points Mike made, I think the
first "review" paragraph could usefully be modified to read
"...ask for a formal review (including reconsideration if that
is appropriate) of the decision." I don't think that needs to
be repeated further on, but will leave that to editorial
judgment. Another way to accomplish the same thing, also
subject to editorial preference, would be to add a sentence
toward the bottom, that indicates that outcome of a review could
include either a decision to do things differently in the future
or reconsideration, if it is not an already-committed business
decision, of the pending action.
john
--On Friday, 21 January, 2005 19:37 -0500 Leslie Daigle
<leslie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 3.5 Business Decisions
>
> Decisions made by the IAD in the course of carrying out IASA
> business
> activities are subject to review by the IAOC.
>
> The decisions of the IAOC must be publicly documented to
> include voting
> records for each formal action.
>
> 3.6 Responsiveness of IASA to the IETF
>
>
> The IAOC is directly accountable to the IETF community for the
> performance of the IASA. However, the nature of the IAOC's
> work
> involves treating the IESG and IAB as major internal
> customers of the
> administrative support services. The IAOC and the IAD should
> not
> consider their work successful unless the IESG and IAB are
> also
> satisfied with the administrative support that the IETF is
> receiving.
> In order to achieve this, the IASA should ensure there are
> reported objective performance metrics for all IETF process
> supporting activities.
>
> In the case where someone questions an action of the IAD or the
> IAOC in meeting the IETF requirements as outlined above, he or
> she
> may ask for a formal review of the decision.
>
> The request for review is addressed to the person or body that
> made
> the decision. It is up to that body to decide to make a
> response,
> and on the form of a response.
>
> The IAD is required to respond to requests for a review from
> the
> IAOC, and the IAOC is required to respond to requests for a
> review
> of a decision from the IAB or from the IESG.
>
> If members of the community feel that they are unjustly denied
> a
> response to a request for review, they may ask the IAB or the
> IESG
> to make the request on their behalf.
>
> Answered requests for review and their responses are made
> public.
>
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf