Please, not more process (was: [IAB] Last Call: Modern Global Standards Paradigm)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sun, Aug 12, 2012 at 11:49:35PM +0200, Carsten Bormann wrote:
> 
> I do believe the process question is an absolutely useful one.  We
> should have a process that is able to handle multilateral activities
> that include the IETF

Why is it useful?  

As far as I know, this is the very first time we have had a problem
shaped exactly like this.  There have been other issues with different
sets of parties on other multilateral activities, but they appear to
have demanded a different kind of response, since that's what they
got.  It seems to me that we could better spend our energies working
on standards (using our actual standards development model rather than
the abstract approximation in the affirmation!) than in working up
rules to govern a circumstance that, we should all hope, will not
arise again in our lifetimes.  Not every single bit of human
interaction requires a process rule.  Some things just require
judgement, and I encourage "the leadership" -- people we put (via the
nomcom) into the position to exercise such judgement -- to do so.
 
Best,

A

PS: I have on purpose not commented about the proposed statement,
because the request was for strong objections, and I have none.

-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]