[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-andersson-mpls-g-chng-proc-00.txt
What Kireeti and Curtis said, and to make things worse, I for one
review the documents that try to make their front page more
convincing than their substance with additional scrutiny...
Tuesday, March 4, 2003, 1:54:24 PM, David Allan wrote:
> You are offering a compelling argument to eliminate crediting of any authors
> on I-Ds etc. We can claim that there is no weight in a consensus based
> organization, while we struggle to eliminate the practice of 20 plus authors
> on a draft.
> I would assume I'm not the only one to note this inconsistency.
>>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
>>attractive backdoor around the IETF process.
>>Also, what does "weight" of a liaison or an ID really mean in a _consensus_
>>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?