[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: jamais deux sans trois ? (was RE: [Ltru] RFC 2277 - considerations)



At 11:53 05/05/11, JFC (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:

>1. this is what what _I_ would like add/remove/replace that Randy asked.

Randy asked for *specific* text. This is how the IETF works:
If oppinions are too far apart, or unclear (or both), specific
text always helps. I don't remember having seen a single line
of specific text from you, but if I missed something, please
tell me.

>2. I certainly want to save time and stop a "consensus developped of the remainder of the WG": this same residual reached the same "consensus" on another list for the same proposition. Do you really want the same result?

Please note that the IETF works with "rough consensus", which does not
mean that everybody agreed completely. The problem with the "other list"
was that it wasn't a WG, which means there were no chairs, and so nobody
who could assess consensus in an official function. The second problem
was that some people complained that they didn't know this work was
going on; this is quite different for the WG which has been widely
announced.

So it's very well possible that on some, or even many, issues, this
WG reaches the same or a similar conclusion as a (by chance or by
expertise and interest) similarly composed (but not chartered group)
has reached before.


Regards, Martin.

_______________________________________________
Ltru mailing list
Ltru at lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ltru




Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.