Brian... On Sun, 2005-06-26 at 17:50 +0200, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > Ralph, > > Ralph Droms wrote: > > I'd like to understand the process through which Dr. Roberts' request > > was reviewed. The first reference I can find to Dr. Roberts' request is > > in the 2005-04-14 minutes of the IESG > > (https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/view_telechat_minute.cgi? > > command=view_minute&id=318 see below). According to the rejection > > announcement, the IESG reviewed the submission and determined that > > "Reviewing this proposal within the IETF as an alternative to the > > ongoing work would be a multi-year endeavor. The IESG is pessimistic > > that this effort would ever achieve consensus." The minutes refer to > > discussion of a "management issue". Was the entire review conducted in > > the meeting on 2005-04-14, or was there additional review conducted > > prior to that meeting? How, exactly, did the IESG review the submission > > and how did the IESG come to its conclusion? > > > > > > - Ralph > > This took many weeks, considerable email, and several informal > discussions before the IESG was sure of its position and able to > record a conclusion in the meeting you cite. Since there was no > IETF contribution (I-D or email on a public list) this process > was indeed invisible. I would have preferred a discussion based > around an IETF draft, but we didn't have one. > Brian I don't understand the cause-and-effect: why would the lack of an IETF contribution lead to an invisible process? Dr. Roberts' original request was apparently received by IANA on 2005-03-25 and forwarded by IANA to the IESG on 2005-04-07. Did the IESG reach its conclusions about the request during its 2005-04-14 teleconference or at a later time? It may be that the IESG minutes aren't clear... - Ralph _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf