Earlier, Paul Hoffman wrote, in part: > ...the IESG just approved publication of X, even with > what appears to be a lack of consensus in the comments > on the ietf@ mailing list. > > (some other text elided here.) > > For a document such as this, why even ask for IETF consensus > if the IETF consensus doesn't matter? > > (remaining text elided here.) Next, as a reference, here is a boilerplate snippet from a recent IETF Last Call: > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits > final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the > ietf at ietf.org mailing lists by 2011-07-21. Exceptionally, comments > may be sent to iesg at ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain > the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. The "IETF Consensus" matters, and I believe the IESG did fully and properly consider that matter in the case that appears to have driven your note. There appears to be a confusion underlying your note. Paul's assertion that public postings to the IETF Discussion list are the only metric for "IETF Consensus" is NOT correct -- and never has been in the past. "IETF Consensus" includes ALL of the inputs that the IESG receives about a document or issue that is put to IETF Last Call. The Last Call announcement specifically says, for example, that comments may be sent privately to the IESG. Consensus inputs are NOT limited to posted public comments, BUT ALSO include formal liaisons, communications with various WG Chairs (not limited to the sponsoring WG), private email to the IESG, private email to an AD, and more. Note also that this is THE SAME as how WG Chairs are supposed to operate. WG Chairs are supposed to consider ALL inputs, NOT ONLY public postings to the WG list, BUT ALSO private inputs from WG participants and other applicable folks, and whatever other inputs arrive after a WG Last Call is announced. I hear that Paul H is unhappy with this particular outcome, but there is no evidence of any kind of process problem or process mistake here. Yours, Ran _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf