I totally agree with Randy. The one distinction is between observing these discussions and being allowed to partake in them. I can understand that you folks might want to limit discussion at IAB meetings to the IAB membership, and then have designated open comment/discussion later where anyone can comment. That is fair, but there should be few exceptions where the IAB discussions/debates should be behind closed doors such as for HR/legal matters. —Tom > On Sep 5, 2018, at 5:00 PM, Randy Bush <randy@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> But there are quite a lot of issues the IAB has to handle that are not >> part of its architecture remit and that do have a political >> angle. Replay the great ICANN/IANA saga a couple of years ago, for >> example. I fear that either the IAB would have been very inhibited in >> its discussions, or they would mainly have been held in executive >> sessions. > > i beg to differ. heck, forget the begging :) > > when it is a personnel or analogous issue, sure > > but when it affects our community, it should be open. and 'politics' > affects our community. the icann/iana saga should have been open. > the ietf prides itself on being open. well, we should walk the walk. > > btw, politics is what happens when more than one person is involved. > > randy
