Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
For what it is worth my takehome from the Montreal meeting was that there was genuine desire for change but no recognition of consensus on a particular way forward. One of the reasons that there is no recognition of consensus on a way forward is that we did not learn the nature of the objections from the IESG or even who was making it. In other words precisely the type of opaque decision making processes that were being criticized.
There was, to recall history, no consensus in newtrk for any particular choice among the various options for simplifying the 3 stage process. So the IESG never saw or responded to any proposal in that area. There was consensus to put forward the ISD proposal, which the IESG kicked back, with an explanation of its issues, which you can find in the newtrk archive. That didn't lead to a revised ISD proposal. Brian _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf