Phillip: Obviously, I was not General AD when this happened. However, I was Security AD at the time, so I was involved in the discussions that included the whole IESG. I made my reply to your posting because I want people to realize that there is another side to the story. We need to learn from the history, but we need to act toward improving the future. The IESG spent a huge amount of time on the NEWTRK documents in retreat. The ISD proposal hit the IESG in a very bad way. The ISD proposal required the IESG spend a lot of time that the individuals simply did not have. Further, this came at a very, very bad time. Admin-Rest had consumed way to many cycles. Perhaps the 1-step or 2-step proposals could have been separated from ISDs, but that was not the path that was taken. I do not know the reasons. Russ On 6/24/2010 6:11 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > My point is that I am unable to have any characterization whatsoever > since nobody has ever told me the reason that the changes did not go ahead. > > And since I have asked for reasons in a plenary and never got any > statement that was not phrased in the passive voice, I don't think it is > unfair to describe the decision as having been made in private. > > If the history is not confidential then I want to know what it was. > Otherwise I don't see why it is inaccurate to describe the process as > top down. > > If the process is going to be described as consensus based and bottom up > then at a minimum the people who take the decision have to be prepared > to state their reasons. > > > > On Thu, Jun 24, 2010 at 3:10 PM, Russ Housley <housley@xxxxxxxxxxxx > <mailto:housley@xxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote: > > I strongly disagree with this characterization. In my view, too many > things got bundled together, and the thing that was unacceptable too the > whole bundle down. > > Russ > > On 6/24/2010 2:52 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker wrote: > > Last time the reforms were blocked without the IETF at large even > > knowing who was responsible. It was a decision the IESG took in > private > > as if it only affected them and they were the only people who should > > have a say. So much for bottom up organization. > > > > > -- > Website: http://hallambaker.com/ > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf