Conclusions on draft-housley-two-maturity-levels

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

 



Discussion on this topic has continued after my first attempt at judging consensus. Additional people provided opinions (both positive and negative), some new ideas were brought up, and some of the previous discussion continued further. Some of the topics in the discussion included:

- status and interpretation of the consensus
- possibilities for making additional process related changes (I promised to start an effort to go through past proposals)
- concerns on the way that current or past process related process changes have been brought forward by the IESG
- alternative or additional proposals (such as Fred Baker's proposal to focus on documenting interoperability)

I have reviewed the mailing list discussion yesterday and have found that while there are more people on the positive side than on the negative side, the consensus is extremely rough, more rough than it was before. It was also very difficult to make a full determination, because a lot of the discussion has been on tangential topics, because in many cases it has been hard to see if a person is on the "no objection", "absolutely not", or "I have these additional ideas" camp, and because not all points raised in the discussion got responses. I have leaned towards recommending to the IESG that there is consensus to move forward. But it is certainly weaker consensus than what I would normally like to see, and my recommendation was in part based on the desire to move from "it does not hurt but we should rather do something else" to actually looking also at some of those other things. I also think we have gotten as far on this topic as we will get.

The IESG discussed the situation with this draft on its call yesterday and decided to approve the document. A formal approval notice will be forthcoming in the next couple of days.

Russ and I are working to compile a list of IETF process-related proposals to find possible additional proposals to take further. Stay tuned. (And if you have process-related improvement/reality-alignment proposals, drop us a note if you have not yet done so.)

Jari


_______________________________________________
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]