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

[Jonathan Sadler <jonathan.sadler@tellabs.com>]

Just an observation...

Its kind of interesting to note that this "equal weight"
philosophy doesn't seem to extend to the IETF when sending
things to other organizations.  Witness the recent proposal
to ISO on IS-IS extensions:

"IS-IS extensions submitted from the IETF to JTC1 will be
processed under the JTC1 fast track procedure. To ensure the
quality of such submissions, IETF SHALL apply to them the
procedures for Proposed Standard submission according to
[RFC2026]."

Wouldn't it be reasonable for other SDOs that have done the
same sort of quality check prior to sending something to the
IETF to be given the same courtesy of "fast track"
review/approval?

Jonathan Sadler

Alex Zinin wrote:

> <regular ietf'er hat on>
>
> Monday, March 3, 2003, 2:26:06 PM, Kireeti Kompella wrote:
> > Hi Steve,
>
> > On Mon, 3 Mar 2003, Stephen Trowbridge wrote:
>
> >> There is no doubt that liaisons CURRENTLY have no more wieght than
> >> individual IDs
>
> > This might be a fundamental difference between the IETF and other SDOs,
> > the ITU in particular.  However, that still doesn't mean that this
> > policy of the IETF's is wrong.  I happen to think that taking everything
> > at its own merit rather than considering where it came from is the most
> > democratic, equal opportunity means of handling it -- but that's a
> > personal philosophy, not necessarily echoed by the IETF.
>
> 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?
>
> Alex

============================================================
The information contained in this message may be privileged 
and confidential and protected from disclosure.  If the 
reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an 
employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any 
reproduction, dissemination or distribution of this 
communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received 
this communication in error, please notify us immediately by 
replying to the message and deleting it from your computer.

Thank you.
Tellabs
============================================================