Re: Consensus - Was: [ga] Review Task Force List is now publicly archived

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Roberto and all assembly members,

  Currently the IETF process is under severe fire by fellow IETF
participants.  I would say that that process is going through too much
change and turmoil to be considered mature enough presently to
be used as guideline of any sort...

Roberto Gaetano wrote:

> I concur with Bret's comment.
> Is there any disagreement to posting this concern as the concern of the GA
> (which means that we keep the concept of consensus)?
> It will also be nice if the GA could come to an agreement on a definition of
> consensus. If I remember correctly, the leading example we used in former
> discussions on the subject was the IETF consensus-building process.
> Maybe Harald or Sandy can point to some RFCs that we can use to start with,
> as soon as they are back from London.
> Incidentally, talking about Sandy, I like the "IETF Guidelines for Conduct"
> (http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-poisson-code-04.txt), and I
> would not mind using that draft as the basis for the GA's "code of conduct"
> (mutatis mutandis, obviously). But this we can discuss another time.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Regards
> Roberto
>
> >From: Bret Fausett <baf@fausett.com>
> >To: <DannyYounger@cs.com>, <ga@dnso.org>
> >Subject: Re: [ga] Review Task Force List is now publicly archived
> >Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2001 23:15:56 -0700
> >
> >Thanks for posting this, Danny.
> >
> >A couple of comments on the agenda items 1 and 6...
> >
> >"DannyYounger@cs.com" <DannyYounger@cs.com> wrote:
> > > 1. Working groups. Lead: Philip.
> > > - "To turn the WG D procedures into a sharper set of guidelines".
> > > I posted this to the virtual site early July and have had no comment
> >yet.
> > > Please look at it and either tell me OK or suggest a change. I will
> >construe
> > > silence as consent. Deadline 15 August. ACTION ALL PLEASE.
> >
> >Keep in mind that the guidelines proposed by WG-D are light and flexible
> >*by
> >design.* We looked at alternatives, tried some more rigid guidelines in
> >earlier drafts, and came to the conclusion that the rules ought to be
> >flexible enough to account for a variety of issues and modes of working.
> >Those who had participated in many IETF working groups felt particularly
> >strong about the need to maintain lightweight and flexible rules of
> >procedure.
> >
> > > 6. Consensus.  Lead Milton
> > > Recommend to the NC a practical definition of consensus for the purposes
> >of
> > > NC consultation activities.
> > > Milton had earlier thoughts on this suggesting that we should drop the
> >word
> > > consensus and just suggest certain majority or super majority rules for
> >DNSO
> > > groups. This seems like a good way forward. Milton - please advise
> >progress
> > > or post to the virtual workroom. Deadline Aug 15.
> >
> >Dropping the word "consensus" would be a mistake for the simple reason that
> >all of the contracts with registries and registrars bind those entities to
> >ICANN "consensus policies." That term has a particular legal significance
> >within ICANN. Since you can't rewrite those contracts, you'll want to draft
> >you rules in account for them. You don't want to run the risk that the NC
> >passes something but the affected parties aren't bound because what the NC
> >did doesn't meet the definition in the contracts about what is a
> >"consensus."
> >
> >      -- Bret
> >
> >--
> >This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> >Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> >("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> >Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html