Re: A few individual comments based on tonight's discussions

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

 



Hiya,

On 27/07/2019 12:47, S Moonesamy wrote:
> 
> It is unlikely that the problem happened overnight.  

Yep.

> Were you provided
> with the right information?  

AFAIK no information was hidden by RSOC. But IMO we (IAB at least,
maybe RSOC members too not sure), failed to ask the right questions,
e.g. as to whether things were generally going well or not.

> I doubt it as the consensus of the IAB was
> to ignore what was going on. 

That is incorrect. There was no such consensus, even though I
and others did individually fail to dig into things sufficiently.
(Note though that by "dig in" I don't mean that the IAB ought
have micromanaged RSOC nor the RSE which is what I think Melinda
was saying also.)

> The consequence is that the IAB would not
> be able to identify an undesirable future outcome.

Incorrect again I think. That's an over-general conclusion
and based on a false premise in any case.

> I'll use the word "you" in general. In my opinion, you are expected to
> have access to more information as you are on the inside.  If you are
> unduly concerned about asking questions which might lead to bruising, it
> could be that you are more interested in being seated on the platform in
> front of the room instead of interacting at peer level.

I can see how someone might have that perception. Without commenting
on any specific current or former IAB members, I think it is fair to
say that over the years different members of the IAB have invested
different levels of energy in carrying out the role. I'm not sure how
one avoids that if you think it a problem, and neither am I sure how
big a problem it is - an IAB member with low activity levels could
be just the right person to provide input in some specific case. (And
of course, if someone were to consider an active IAB mostly as a
potential menace that person might even prefer that the IAB sit there
on stage glorying in their pointlessness:-)

Cheers,
S.

Attachment: 0x5AB2FAF17B172BEA.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


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

  Powered by Linux