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

[Alex Zinin <zinin@psg.com>]

Jonathan,

  When the IETF suddenly loses its interest in one of its protocols
  and another SDO has a concentration of expertise on it, an
  individual IETF submission targeted to STD track will naturally
  receive such fast track processing.

-- 
Alex

Wednesday, March 5, 2003, 9:57:45 AM, Jonathan Sadler wrote:
> 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
> ============================================================