SORT BY:

LIST ORDER
THREAD
AUTHOR
SUBJECT


SEARCH

IPS HOME


    [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

    RE: Point of Order



    > What is the protocol for establishing consensus on any given issue so that
    > the WG can move forward to NEW issues? Tabling controversial subjects
    until
    > a later date also seems to be a reasonable option so that progress can be
    > made on a spec.
    
    There is no IETF version of Roberts Rules of Order.  Section 3.3 of RFC 2418
    contains a general discussion of this area.  Note that your WG co-chair did
    attempt to table the controversial sessions topic and got overridden by some
    people who (I hope) learned something from the resulting mess.
    
    > It seems logical to me that each area in the spec should be discussed
    > (brainstormed) and then voted on or shelved until later. Discussion should
    > center around the spec and issues therein instead of on random flaming,
    > flying, dueling email threads. IMHO, 200 emails in two days is too much!
    
    One person's "random flaming" can be another person's "technical
    contribution".
    Allowing a wide degree of latitude to discussions helps to ensure that all
    the
    relevant technical information and viewpoints are brought to bear, and my
    preference has been to only shut down a thread that has clearly veered off
    into the weeds.
    
    iSCSI is at a fairly early point in its lifetime and hence there are
    significant
    open issues.  The emails in the past few days have been mostly on naming,
    flow control and sessions, all of which are important open issues that have
    to be settled to get the spec done -- I have not seen much email that I
    would classify as completely irrelevant and off-topic.  A structured review
    (e.g., on a section by section basis) works best for a relatively stable
    spec
    (e.g., where large portions have not changed across several versions).
    iSCSI is not at that stage, if for no other reason than the amount of
    discussion on some of these basic issues.
    
    > I think it would help greatly if the WG chair(s) would provide a periodic
    > "point-of-order" to focus or re-focus discussion by the teaming masses.
    
    The intent is to appoint another co-chair and two Technical Coordinators 
    shortly who will be able to help with tasks like this.  
    
    --David
    
    ---------------------------------------------------
    David L. Black, Senior Technologist
    EMC Corporation, 42 South St., Hopkinton, MA  01748
    +1 (508) 435-1000 x75140     FAX: +1 (508) 497-8500
    black_david@emc.com       Mobile: +1 (978) 394-7754
    ---------------------------------------------------
    
    


Home

Last updated: Tue Sep 04 01:06:48 2001
6315 messages in chronological order