General comment on draft-ietf-problem-statement-00.txt

[Margaret Wasserman]

Dave, I don't think I've ever been to one of your meetings, but
I certainly don't think of you as a passive, compliant automaton,
or anything like that.

Although I started this thread, I don't actually object to ADs
attending my meetings, particularly the ones at the IETF.  I
often go out of my way to invite ADs from other areas to my
meetings, in fact.

I do, sometimes, think that we could be more productive if we
had more interim meetings, but they can be difficult to schedule,
due to the need for AD approval and attendance.  And, that's really
what I was thinking about when I mentioned some concerns
regarding the need for ADs to attend all meetings.

In point of fact, though, none of my (3) shepherding ADs have
been disruptive or difficult in any of the meetings that I've
held.  Not even Randy, as hard as that may be to imagine :-).

Margaret


At 01:17 PM 3/3/2003 -0500, Harrington, David wrote:
>HI Margaret,
>
>I sure hope you don't count me in "some people". I work hard to ensure 
>that the IETF, not the IESG, make the substantive decisions, and to make 
>sure the IESG pay attention to the decisions made by the IETF.
>
>dbh
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Margaret Wasserman [mailto:mrw at windriver.com]
>
>Some people are comfortable with the idea that all substantive
>decisions rest with the IESG (with the possibility of appeal to
>the IAB).