The IETF works by rough consensus. The fact that you want specific text added while there has not been significant support (in fact to my eye there has been no support) does not indicate the absence of rough consensus. I agree with the opinions expressed that the text you want does not belong in this document at all.
With regard to Harald's original question, I believe this document is "good enough". We can refine it from now till doomsday.
Yours,
Joel M. HalpernAt 06:06 PM 2/2/2005, JFC (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:
If the question is only that, answer is "no".
Reason why, is the draft says that there is no open issue. It also says:"The IETF is a consensus-based group, and authority to act on behalf of the community requires a high degree of consensus and the continued consent of the community. After a careful process of deliberation, a broad-based community consensus emerged to house the IETF Administrative Support Activity (IASA) within the Internet Society.This document reflects that consensus."
Yet the request that the following text is added in Part 4 has been objected by you and discussed with others, on the list and off list. The carefull process of deliberation is not completed, and has not lead to a consensus.
This text is: "International: ISOC shall work with its national Chapters, the IAD and IAOC to document how the IETF meetings and the Internet standard process could benefit from the local presence, market knowledge and languages familiarity of these Chapters."
jfc
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf