RE: I-D ACTION:draft-andersson-mpls-g-chng-proc-00.txt

["Thomas D. Nadeau" <tnadeau@cisco.com>]

        Dave,

> Alex:
>
> You are offering a compelling argument to eliminate crediting of any 
> authors on I-Ds etc.
> We can claim that there is no weight in a consensus based organization, 
> while we struggle to eliminate the practice of 20 plus authors on a draft.
        This is a completely different issue which to my knowledge
has been worked out by the IESG. If there are too many authors,
we put them in a contributors section and have a few editors.
As far as I know, IETF documents are given the same implicit weight no
matter who writes them.

        --Tom


> I would assume I'm not the only one to note this inconsistency.
>
> Cheers
> Dave
>
> <snipped>
>
> >
> >Bingo!
> >
> >It seems to me that this is the only way to ensure fairness in the IETF, 
> actually. Once
> >we start introducing any sorts of preferences or "weights", it may 
> become a too
> >attractive backdoor around the IETF process.
>
> >Also, what does "weight" of a liaison or an ID really mean in a 
> _consensus_ based
> >organization? That we should suddenly have a worm and fuzzy feeling 
> about that doc? And
> >how does this "weight" compare to, for example, the weight of the 
> consensus within the
> >IETF to not do what's proposed, if that happens?