Search RPD Archives
Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by:

[rpd] Criteria for Eligibility or Selection of PDWG Co-Chairs

Fri Feb 19 09:08:26 UTC 2021

Hi Noah,

I disagree, it is exactly the same:

I “provoked” a discussion and the PDWG followed and then we reached consensus.

You “provoked” a discussion with a set of requirements and the PDWG is following it to reach consensus.

Be sure that I will contribute, don’t cut down the email that shows clearly what I said. We can disagree, but not play with words, that's unfair, so repeating myself:

Setting a criterion without a policy proposal and the subsequent PDP process is *against the PDP*.

Nevertheless, if this is the path that the PDWG prefer, because this is about consensus, I agree.

I will like to change the priority (make it a bit shorter also), add something but take something out:

Understanding of RFC7282.
Not being author of any of the actual policy proposals in discussion.
Active (not just reading emails) participation in PDWG. I think 2 years is good enough.
Clear understanding of CPM/PDP.
At least 3 years of experience in networking.

Asking to be a member is discriminatory. If we add that, it should a “wish”, but never excluding. I see folks that I believe aren’t members and are contributing actively and their rationales are very logic.

I think they should also commit, to ask help to staff or external experts when they don’t have knowledge in any specific topic before taking decisions and ensure that they are engaged with the participant discussions to clarify their position before going to take a decision “on-site” in the meeting.




El 19/2/21 10:03, "Noah" <noah at> escribió:

On Fri, Feb 19, 2021 at 11:54 AM JORDI PALET MARTINEZ via RPD <rpd at> wrote:

Now, you are doing exactly the same that you complained I did. Surprising!

Not at all... on the contrary, the working group is participating in a discussion that stemmed from another discussion that had been started by Sylvain.

Since you are a participant in the WG, I encourage you to contribute to the discussion.


IPv4 is over
Are you ready for the new Internet ?
The IPv6 Company

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the exclusive use of the individual(s) named above and further non-explicilty authorized disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited and will be considered a criminal offense. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, even if partially, including attached files, is strictly prohibited, will be considered a criminal offense, so you must reply to the original sender to inform about this communication and delete it.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the RPD mailing list