1. WG Decision Making Margaret Wasserman margaret@thingmagic.com WG Chairs Lunch IETF 66, Montreal Margaret Wasserman margaret@thingmagic.com WG Chairs Lunch IETF 66, Montreal

2. WG Chair Decision Making  Introduction  What do the RFCs Say?  Complex Role of the WG Chair  Mechanisms for Decision Making  “Tools” for Decision Making  Panel Discussion/Roundtable  Panel: David Black, Olafur Gudmundsson & Bob Hinden  Introduction  What do the RFCs Say?  Complex Role of the WG Chair  Mechanisms for Decision Making  “Tools” for Decision Making  Panel Discussion/Roundtable  Panel: David Black, Olafur Gudmundsson & Bob Hinden

3. What do the RFCs Say?  RFC 2418:  Working groups make decisions through a "rough consensus" process.  It is the function of the Working Group Chair(s) to manage the group process… the overall purpose of the group is to make progress towards reaching rough consensus  RFC 2418:  Working groups make decisions through a "rough consensus" process.  It is the function of the Working Group Chair(s) to manage the group process… the overall purpose of the group is to make progress towards reaching rough consensus

4. What do the RFCs Say? (2)  RFC 2418:  IETF consensus does not require that all participants agree although this is, of course, preferred. In general, the dominant view of the working group shall prevail.  Consensus can be determined by a show of hands, humming, or any other means on which the WG agrees.  RFC 2418:  IETF consensus does not require that all participants agree although this is, of course, preferred. In general, the dominant view of the working group shall prevail.  Consensus can be determined by a show of hands, humming, or any other means on which the WG agrees.

5. What do the RFCs Say (3)  RFC 2418:  Note that 51% of the working group does not qualify as "rough consensus" and 99% is better than rough.  It is up to the Chair to determine if rough consensus has been reached.  RFC 2418:  Note that 51% of the working group does not qualify as "rough consensus" and 99% is better than rough.  It is up to the Chair to determine if rough consensus has been reached.

6. What do the RFCs Say? (4)  RFC 3929:  “Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consensus-Blocked Decisions in the IETF”  Offers a set of tools that WG chairs can use to make decisions  Use of alternative methods requires WG consensus, as consistent with RFC 2418  RFC 3929:  “Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consensus-Blocked Decisions in the IETF”  Offers a set of tools that WG chairs can use to make decisions  Use of alternative methods requires WG consensus, as consistent with RFC 2418

7. Complex Role of WG Chair  WG Chair judges when the WG has reached rough consensus  The WG Chair may structure questions or discussion to determine areas of agreement or disagreement  The WG Chair DOES NOT make a decision for the group  All decisions require rough WG consensus  WG Chair judges when the WG has reached rough consensus  The WG Chair may structure questions or discussion to determine areas of agreement or disagreement  The WG Chair DOES NOT make a decision for the group  All decisions require rough WG consensus

8. Complex Role of WG Chair (2)  WG Chair needs to balance:  Need for forward progress  Time to ensure that all views are expressed and heard  Desire to declare consensus and move forward  Fairness to all participants  WG Chair needs to balance:  Need for forward progress  Time to ensure that all views are expressed and heard  Desire to declare consensus and move forward  Fairness to all participants

9. Complex Role of WG Chair (3)  It is a WG Chair’s job to _lead_ a WG towards consensus -- not just sit there and hope it happens  Understand the views of both sides. Find points of agreement and disagreement. Build on points of agreement.  Work with individuals to remind them that the progress of the overall item is more important than a single issue  Frame the issues in a way that allows members of the WG to come to agreement  It is a WG Chair’s job to _lead_ a WG towards consensus -- not just sit there and hope it happens  Understand the views of both sides. Find points of agreement and disagreement. Build on points of agreement.  Work with individuals to remind them that the progress of the overall item is more important than a single issue  Frame the issues in a way that allows members of the WG to come to agreement

10. Mechanisms for Consensus  At Meetings:  Hums, straw polls  Outside Meetings:  Straw polls, on-line surveys  Any mechanism the WG agrees to use  See examples in RFC 3929  At Meetings:  Hums, straw polls  Outside Meetings:  Straw polls, on-line surveys  Any mechanism the WG agrees to use  See examples in RFC 3929

11. “Tools” for Decision Making  WG Chair Leadership  Understand the views of both sides. Find points of agreement and disagreement. Build on points of agreement  Work with individuals to remind them that the progress of the overall item is more important than a single issue  Frame the issues in a way that allows members of the WG to come to agreement  WG Chair Leadership  Understand the views of both sides. Find points of agreement and disagreement. Build on points of agreement  Work with individuals to remind them that the progress of the overall item is more important than a single issue  Frame the issues in a way that allows members of the WG to come to agreement

12. “Tools” for Decision Making (2)  Bring in outside experts to educate the group on tradeoffs and alternatives  Form a design team of people with different views that are committed to reaching a compromise  Need to check results with full WG  Back up and define requirements of the solution, to assist in making choices:  Only works when there is disagreement about the requirements, not to choose between two choices that address the same requirements  Bring in outside experts to educate the group on tradeoffs and alternatives  Form a design team of people with different views that are committed to reaching a compromise  Need to check results with full WG  Back up and define requirements of the solution, to assist in making choices:  Only works when there is disagreement about the requirements, not to choose between two choices that address the same requirements

13. Panel/Round Table Discussion