Scott, > I would think that the issue is 'is there consensus to remove > something that is currently in the spec' - i.e., the removal > of an established feature needs strong support, the default is > to keep it. > (note that the above observation is not a comment on the > specific question, it is comment on proper process in the IETF) As I was reading these documents again, it is not clear to me that they cover the situation. Trying to resume Tony's appeal in one sentence, I would say "The subject of the so-called consensus was not clear, therefore the so-called consensus shall be voided". I failed to find text that would define what could be appropriate matter for a consensus call and what could not. For example, it is common practice to call for consensus on IDs or on what to do with an ID. In a meeting, it is common practice to call for consensus on a slide being presented on the screen or on an agenda item. Does it appear to you that a clear definition of what is appropriate matter for a consensus call could be an addition to a revised RFC 2418? br, Michel.
