On Mon, Sep 10, 2007 at 11:56:15AM -0700, Eric Rescorla wrote: > At Mon, 10 Sep 2007 13:52:00 -0500, > Nicolas Williams wrote: > > Are you saying that a design team can't have "consensus" or "consensus > > calls"? Surely they can, though consensus internal to design teams > > cannot, and, indeed, must not be binding on any other aspect of IETF > > processes. > > Indeed. And so when the "document shepherd" implies that he or the > AD will be issuing consensus calls, I think that implies something > quite different from some internal design team consensus call. I don't see the implication. > > So my question is: is the ietf-http-auth mailing list intended to act as > > a forum for a design team working on draft-hartman-webauth-phishing? > > Good question. Let's ask the author of the document, who is the only > person who can speak to the future direction of an individual > submission. Sam? Actually, looking at the I-D's state and the IESG evaluation record I see that it is not clear that the document either passed or failed IETF LC, and that it might yet be approved. > > I think that's exactly what's happening. > > That's not what I see, unless Alexey suddenly became the author of > the document. Rather, I see someone claiming to be the document > shepherd acting under the direction of the AD talking about the > way forward. How is that the author revising the document, trying > to build consensus, etc.? Why on Earth couldn't Sam let Alexey run a design team to come up with improvements that Sam could make to the I-D? Of course, we've not heard from Sam on this (or if we have, I've missed it -- I don't subscribe to the main ietf list). Nico -- _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf