Hi SM, You give plain-text quotations from another message (or messages?), but with no Reply-To header or full quoted passages inline, it's hard to provide an answer in the proper context, but I will try. My interpretation (at least to the extent I recall) of John's classification of two types of process proposals is that it was mostly descriptive, of an "either X or not X" sense, and thus uncontroversial. The role of the IESG in the standards process is described in BCP 9; I would characterize what's described there as having the IESG be the primary authority for standards decisions, but given the possibility of appeals, not the final authority. There is some degree of terminology definition involved, so I could see others providing a different answer. You did not ask me specifically for my opinion on "members of the community" but since I'm replying to the rest of your note I'll make an attempt at that as well: to me, taking an action to have an interaction with the activities of the IETF is enough to make one a member of the community. That could be as much as reading email on our mailing lists, through authoring drafts and RFCs, holding leadership positions, and more. Different individuals will of course have different levels of involvement in the community, and I acknowledge that there will be situations in which the level of involvement will matter for one reason or another, but the core idea remains that we are an open community and taking action to be a part of it ought to suffice. -Ben On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:47:56AM -0700, S Moonesamy wrote: > Dear Ms Kuehlewind, > > There is the following sentence in Mr Klensin's email: "The IETF has > a rather long and difficult history, with only a few exceptions since > the POISED and POISSON WGs, of there being two types of process > change proposals". Is that incorrect? > > There is also the following sentence: "They, and especially ones that > members of the IESG see as a threat to their authority or the way > they do things and sometimes as adding work, have tended to > vanish". Is the IESG the final authority for all standards decisions? > > The term "members of the community" is mentioned in your reply. What > does a person have to do become a member of the community? > > Regards, > S. Moonesamy >
