Re: Why ask for IETF Consensus on a WG document?

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

 



On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 09:36:13AM -0700, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:

> By contrast, working groups tend to contain more expertise than may
> be available in an IETF LC; that's partly why they're formed.  I've
> never been an AD before, but I imagine I might consider the WG
> consensus to be at least a little bit more weighty than IETF LC
> resistance.

I rather hope not.  As someone else has argued in this thread, WGs
tend to be narrowly focussed.  The IETF LC is at least partly, as I
understand it, to make sure that something which seems an obviously
good idea to the WG doesn't have all manner of implications that the
WG perhaps did not consider.

It seems to me that very strong reaction in the IETF generally to a
proposal demands convincing counter-arguments from those who support
the publication.  I refuse to have an opinion about the example under
discussion, but surely we don't want to build in some preference for
what the WG says.

Best,

A
-- 
Andrew Sullivan
ajs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf


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