Re: Last Call: <draft-moonesamy-ietf-conduct-3184bis-03.txt> (IETF Guidelines for Conduct) to Best Current Practice

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

 



Hi Murray,
At 08:31 08-11-2013, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
The document shepherd has the same responsibility as the editor, which is to confirm that the document reflects consensus of the community on all points (plus the IESG followup stuff). Authority (such as it is) to decide what's in and what's out lies with the community. The worst that could happen is that the author and shepherd disagree about what has consensus, and at maximum the shepherd could note the discrepancy in the document's writeup and let the IESG determine consensus on the disputed point.

The document editor documents the points which has gained agreement. If there is disagreement or it is not clear what has gained agreement the document shepherd can provide advice. It's unlikely that I would disagree with the document shepherd. The sponsoring Area Director can step in to provide guidance. The IESG gets to make the determination of consensus.

Who is the shepherd for this one?  The tracker shows none assigned.

Ines Robles is the document shepherd.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy




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