[rfc-i] draft-iab-rfc-editor-model-v2-02 - policy authority

Dave CROCKER dhc at dcrocker.net
Thu Jul 7 07:00:28 PDT 2011

On 7/7/2011 5:24 AM, Olaf Kolkman wrote:
> Responding to Dave CROCKER, more for context than to engage in debate.
>> A way to put the choice here:
>> 1.  For matters of policy, is the final assessment done by the IAB?  If
>> not, then who?  By final, I mean top of the appeals chain, if there is
>> one.(*)
>> 2.  Whoever does that final assessment, is the decision make based on their
>> own preferences or based on their sense of community rough consensus, for
>> some definition of community?
>> 3. If they do it on their own, why is community rough consensus not used?
> I've been pondering about this a bit.
> As for 1, final assessment, that is the IAB. As for 2, decision based on
> their own preference or community rough consensus: I'd say it is the IAB that
> takes responsibility for the final decision (so the decision is _theirs_).
> However that decision is rooted in the sense of community rough consensus.

Here's an attempt at clarifying the meaning of "rooted in the sense of community 
rough consensus":

1. If the community provides no clear indication of rough consensus, 
can/should/will the IAB still make a decision?  If so, what kind of criteria 
will the IAB use.  For example, it might choose to use a vote of the IAB.

2. If the community provides a clear indication of rough consensus, but the 
majority (or more) of the IAB disagrees with it, is the IAB empowered to make a 
decisions that differs from the apparent community rough consensus?

> Which answers 3.

Sorry, but I don't see it.  What part of your text answered the "why" of #3?

> Anyhow, more to the point. In trying to come up with a more stricter
> definition of "Internet Community" I came up with the text below. This puts
> the burden on the RSE to seek input in places where she thinks that is
> relevant an provide an explanation why those places are selected and other
> places are not actively reached out to. This is, as part of the
> recommendation, part of the final decision.
> Does that work?
> <suggestion>
> Policy Authority
> All decisions are to be made in the overall interest of the Internet
> community.  The RSE is responsible to identify materially concerned interest
> groups within the Internet community and reach out to them. Those interest
> groups naturally include the IETF community, but may also, for example,
> include the Network research and network operations communities.


> The RSE must consult with the community on policy issues.  The RSE works with
> the community to achieve policy that meets the overall quality, continuity,
> and evolution goals the RSE is charged with meeting.  As described below in
> Section 3.1 the RSE reports the results of such interactions, to the RSOC,

    interactions, to -> interactions to

> including a description of the outreach efforts and the specific
> recommendations on policy.  This enables the RSOC to provide the oversight
> the IAB is required to apply, as well as to confirm that the Internet
> community has been properly consulted and considered in making policy.




   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking

More information about the rfc-interest mailing list