thoughts on w.g. concensus process
Bob Hinden
hinden at IPRG.nokia.com
Mon Mar 24 15:03:05 CET 2003
I have been the chair of several working groups where we were able to reach
consensus on divisive topics. I have several observations on the process
based on this experience.
In order for a working group to reach a consensus on a single solution
there first has to be a consensus that doing so is desirable. This might
not be obvious, but there can be lots of reasons why people won't agree
that this is important. Some reasons I have seen include (in no particular
order) 1) Fear that their solution won't be picked, 2) Not wanting any
solution in this area (e.g,. raising objections instead of working toward
solutions), 3) No compelling market need so there is little reason to reach
closure (e.g., more research focus than product focus), 4) Disagreement
that a single solution is appropriate (e.g., a single solution may not
really solve the problem, or people disagree on the cost/benefit ratios of
different solutions).
Unless the working group chairs can lead the working group to the point
where there is agreement that a single solution is valuable, it is unlikely
to happen. It is easiest to do this when the different solutions are only
different in details (e.g., how to encapsulate IP on a particular link
type) and/or there is short term market need. If the solutions address
different problems and/or there is no pressing market need it may not be
possible. Sometimes there can be a middle ground where the group agrees
with most of what is in a document, and there is only disagreement on a few
items. In this case, a push by the working group chair(s) for the need for
completion can work to get people to put aside their differences.
I don't think reaching a consensus is directly related to the size of a
working group, but it can be easier if the group is smaller. Even a small
group can deadlock if the conditions mentioned above aren't
resolved. Large groups are also known to reach consensus too.
In my view, the most important job of working group chair(s) to lead the
w.g. toward a consensus. It's is a process that requires leadership more
than anything else.
Bob
p.s. I think that choosing from among different solutions is the core work
of the IETF. The IETF is not a research group where solutions are
invented. It is an engineering group whose focus is to pick from available
solutions and create an open standard. The IETF's consensus process is
well suited to picking from available solutions. It is not a good approach
for research. Sometimes I think we get this confused.
More information about the Problem-statement
mailing list