In message <00a101c598fe$b02fb980$c51eff56@DFNJGL21>, "Spencer Dawkins" writes:
>I rarely if ever argue with you about protocol stuff, because you're
>pretty good at protocols, and our process IS a protocol, but I do see
>"returned to clear DISCUSS" items on the IESG telechat agendas. So, I
>bet you're right, but there is running code that we actually DO end up
>sliding to the next telechat, at least some of the time.
I think the detailed minutes will clarify this, but there's no one
Often, the DISCUSSing AD will clear a DISCUSS offline, in which case
things proceed on request of the sponsoring AD. This is often the case
for relatively simple issues, especially when dealt with promptly.
If a document takes a while to come back, or if the changes are
complex, it can be returned to the agenda so that the changes can be,
well, discussed. Maybe the objecting AD isn't happy enough, but the
sponsoring AD thinks they might be persuadable by the other ADs.
That's been known to happen. A document with multiple substantive
DISCUSSes often comes back, because the changes can be interdependent.
Finally -- and this is painful -- sometimes the objecting AD doesn't
respond to private requests to clear a DISCUSS. Putting the document
on the agenda is a forcing function. This last one shouldn't happen,
but it does.
--Steven M. Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
Ietf mailing list