> > You seem to think that every IETF participant _except_ those on IESG > > should do so. You seem to think that everyone else should be able to > > exercise their judgement but that the IESG should just serve as > > process facilitators and rubber stamp technical decisions that others > > make. > > Perhaps I'm wrong, but I thought the exercise of IETF judgement relied on > rough consensus. I was talking about each individual using his own technical judgement to make decisions entrusted to him. But no, it's not the case that all decisions made in IETF are made by rough consensus. That applies to decisions made within working groups, but working groups are only part of our process. > Having a subset of folks impose their own, personal > preferences -- oh, sorry, their judgement -- is not using rough consensus to > make ietf decisions. In other words, when you make the decision, you're using your best judgement. When someone on IESG makes a decision you do not like, it's personal preference. > In other words, Keith, I did not say what you are asserting. I did not mean > what you are asserting. > > What I said is that the IETF is supposed to be the decision-maker, not the IESG. >From RFC 2026, section 6: The experienced collective judgment of the IESG concerning the technical quality of a specification proposed for elevation to or advancement in the standards track is an essential component of the decision-making process. Ketih _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf