Re: Last Call: 'Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consensus-blocked Decisions in the IETF' to Experimental RFC

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

 



Scott Bradner wrote:

might be better as:
   In no way should this experiment or any future BCP for this small
   number of cases take precendence over the IETF's normal mode of
   operation. Specifically, these procedures are only to be
   used when a working group agrees to use them.

Define "agrees". When a WG is blocked on consensus for a technical issue, and someone proposes using the alternative process to reach a decision, do you need consensus to use the alternative process? If so, I'm skeptical that people who have been stonewalling each other on the technical decision are going to agree to a process that means they don't get to stonewall any more.

--
/=================================================================\
|John Stracke      |jstracke@xxxxxxxxxxx                          |
|Principal Engineer|http://www.centive.com                        |
|Centive           |My opinions are my own.                       |
|=================================================================|
|"If nobody believes what I say, I feel ineffective." "Oh, I don't|
|believe that."                                                   |
\=================================================================/


_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]