[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Comments on draft-iesg-charter-02.txt





--On mandag, mars 10, 2003 15:45:52 -0500 Scott Bradner <sob@harvard.edu> wrote:

The IESG charter document includes a list of liaison positions
that are part of the IESG a
"part of" seems the wrong term but I now see what you mean

your text seemed to ask who appointed them - (not the IESG's problem,
that is done by the "other" body, but could be an IESG problem if the
wrong person gets appointed :-) )

if you are asking 'who says add or remove a liaison' then, like most
things, it works out to an IESG consensus

but its not the sort of thing that I would think would need to be
called out individually - a blanket statement that the IESG works
by consensus unliess otherwise stated should be fine.
I think the question was more "if someone wants an RIR liaison on the IESG, who decides that?" or "if someone doesn't want the RFC Editor to have a liaison to the IESG any more, who decides that?"

we haven't changed those for so long that it's actually a good question.