In message <8D23D4052ABE7A4490E77B1A012B6307751CF72F@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, T ed Lemon writes: > On Jun 10, 2013, at 7:21 PM, SM <sm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I agree that one-line statements are not of much use. It's more tedious = > to write a statement to support a proposal than an objection to it. Non-si= > lent Last Calls usually draw objections. It's going to be difficult to bal= > ance that if one-line statements of support (or objections) are not conside= > red in a determination of consensus. > > Determining consensus in an IETF last call is a bit more complicated than t= > hat. It's not a working group last call. If someone objects to publicat= > ion during IETF last call, and their objection has already been discussed a= > nd addressed in the working group, the objection in IETF last call doesn't = > break that consensus. Which breaks some of the reasons why we do IETF last calls. WGs do get too focused on a problem and do fail to do a balance response to problems. Mark -- Mark Andrews, ISC 1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: marka@xxxxxxx