Re: Transparency of IAOC

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

 



Hi Brian, Ted, Spencer,
At 13:32 12-04-2016, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
Of course it is. But (compared to the IESG) the IAOC does deal with a
comparatively large fraction of issues that have confidential aspects -

I'll skip this as there is a comment at http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg97822.html

At 13:33 12-04-2016, Ted Lemon wrote:
I feel I can speak as an authority on this topic when I say that there is zero chance that this is a problem. Â If the IAOC do not always do what we want, it is because (a) that is impossible, since there is no "we" that is both in agreement and also representative of the wishes of all IETF participants and (b) I know everybody on the IAOC and they just don't behave as if they think complaining by IESG people is a problem.

Ok.

At 13:51 12-04-2016, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:
SM, if you're talking about people in "leadership" (is that what we are?) asking questions of the IAOC on the IETF mailing list, you may very well be right.

The term "leadership" was used in the message at https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg77723.html

But I do drop notes to the IAOC directly, either to the IAD or to the overall IAOC, and I don't know how anyone in the broader community would know that I've done that.

Ok.

Regards,
-sm




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