Subject: Re: On the IETF Consensus process

From: Lakshminath Dondeti <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 16:13:46 -0700

The process issues I am raising are fixable.  People need to be aware of 
the issues and communicate better.  We need to think of ways to force 
transparency and remove the bad apples from positions of power as soon 
as possible:  If a lot of people feel that an AD or an IAB member is not 
following process, biased or otherwise incompetent, well then, as 
painful as it might be, we need to put the recall process to test. 
There is no need to wait until the regular nomcom cycle.

Next, I know a number of people at the IETF who care about our 
principles, are passionate about following them and who argue for them, 
sometimes at the cost of their careers at their places of employment. 
Those are the "IETF."

Finally, whereas I may have examples where things could be better or 
where I was unable to get some things done at the IETF, I am raising 
these issues independent of any one particular issue or problem.  What I 
am learning in the process is that some look at all of this from an 
"idealistic" viewpoint and think that everything is fine and a few who 
think that drastic measures are needed.  I am of the view point that we 
need more transparency and that we need to introduce more checks and 
balances on ADs and IAB members in how they exercise their power.  Many 
of us will be at the losing end of arguments and that may have serious 
implications in the real world; but, as long as the process is fair and 
open, and the rules are followed, we should all be able to deal with 
being at the losing end of arguments.

I am optimistic that we can make the process fair and open.

best regards,
Lakshminath

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

---

From: Stephen Farrell <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2007 01:05:21 +0100

I generally disregard messages that say things like
"we need to..." a bunch of times but never say what
or exactly why.

If there's something you want, can't you say what it
is, so we can see if it makes sense?

S

---

From: Lakshminath Dondeti <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2007 17:50:29 -0700

Hmm, I am not sure whether you read all the messages, but I started out 
expressing some concerns to see if I am alone or if there are other 
people who share those concerns.

Here are some concrete takeaways for me so far:

1. "Make IAB BoF reports public" and in general make the process more 
transparent.
2. "Need more practical control processes on ineffective or disruptive 
people in leadership positions"

If you need explanations why, please read earlier emails closely.

Lakshminath

PS: As a side note, even if someone were unable to make concrete 
suggestions, we as a community have a responsibility to talk to people 
to figure out if a group of us perceive the process differently than 
others.  If that is vague, consider "non native speakers" as one such 
groups.  How exactly is a message such as yours helpful in that case?