[Internal-cg] IETF response to ICG
Jari Arkko
jari.arkko at piuha.net
Mon Jan 12 17:51:20 UTC 2015
> I don't think it is appropriate for people who were actively engaged in developing a proposal, and who come only from the affected operational community, to be the ONLY ones evaluating it for the ICG as a whole. That lack of objectivity will not have the legitimacy we need.
>
> On the other hand, I think it is important for someone who understands how the proposal evolved and why certain decisions were made to be present during the evaluation. So I would call for both types of parties to play a role in the initial evaluation, rather than excluding one or the other.
This seems very reasonable. Thanks.
Jari
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 842 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/internal-cg/attachments/20150112/4cea1031/signature.asc>
More information about the Internal-cg
mailing list