Narrowing IESG Process Flexibilities
draft-klensin-process-planb-00

Abstract

One basic model for IETF operations is that the IESG is given general guidance in specific procedural documents but sufficient discretion and flexibility to adapt the rules and make new ones in order to make the IETF work smoothly. This model underlies a number of reform proposals, including recent ones from this author. However, there has been an undercurrent of suspicion from some members of the community -- suspicion that the IESG is abusive of that discretion and cannot be trusted. Those suspicions have, to some extent, been reinforced by questions about IESG-adopted procedures that seem to contradict procedures approved by the community and documented in BCPs. The community cannot move forward with models based on both trust and distrust in the IESG's ability, and level of responsibility, to do its job. In an attempt to focus this part of the debate, this document proposes to dramatically narrow IESG's scope of authority and discretion. In particular, it proposes to move the IESG, procedurally, onto an 'anything not explicitly required is forbidden' model, and, indeed, a very narrow and punitive member of that family. While the author believes this would be a terrible idea, it appears to be time that the community either focuses on it and moves in this direction or stops wasting time hinting about it.

Authors

Dr. John C. Klensin

(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)