Well, if you think that "can do organizations" need to Do The Right Thing from time to time. ...
On Sun, Mar 29, 2020 at 2:41 PM Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Sure, but we could do a one-time variance as a BCP inside 6 weeks if people are sensible. (A few days to draft it, 4 week last call, a few days to finalise the text, run the IESG ballot, and one-day turnaround at the RFC Editor.) We are supposed to be a can-do organisation.
If you get as far as an AD requesting IETF Last Call, which is still what we do for maximum visibility in the community, what would it take (in this specific case) to start working toward implementing the workaround, and assuming that you're either Doing The Right Thing, or that Last Call will blow up quickly, and you'll know you should wait for the responsible AD to provide further direction? Even at that point, if the emergency action is a horrible plan, the decision to request Last Call, or to move forward optimistically, can be appealed, Now that I think about it, the decision to move forward optimistically should be included in the Last Call announcement.
If something is an emergency, ISTM that including "and then we wait four weeks" is not a great way to respond to an emergency.
If it's not an emergency, we have all the BCPs we need to guide us (especially if we tweak https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3933 with a view to moving faster than seemed necessary in 2004).
But Make Good Choices, of course.
Best,
Spencer
p.s.
I haven't worked on a lot of BCPs, but I've worked on enough to know that trying to predict corner cases in advance is hard (and tends to give you a fair amount of text that's not helpful when you need it). Can we not tweak the plan for Nomcom 2020/2021 until it's too late to use it?
Brian
