e
On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 4:38 AM Eliot Lear <lear@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi, Eric,On 16 Sep 2019, at 11:41, Eric Rescorla <ekr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:I don't think that's what I said, or at least not what I meant to say. If people who have had their say in the WG subsequently opt not to participate in the IETF list -- for whatever reason, even if because they find the IETF list aversive -- that does not mean that their views are not included in the consensus process.If a point is raised during LC discussion that has not been addressed earlier, then that person is absenting him/herself from the consensus process at the time of LC.
This seems like it's painting with an unnecessarily broad brush. Consider the case where a document goes through WGLC and has strong consensus. Then an issue is raised in IETF LC on one specific aspect of the protocol and addressed by one of the authors but nobody else speaks up. That doesn't generally diminish the overall consensus for the document
-Ekr
If the point was already raised during WG development, then that person’s view could count. After all, if the same point was raised, and s/he answered it once, why would that view be considered no longer valid? As a practical matter, I don’t know how that would be taken into account. And that is not the same as the person being silent during WGLC.
Eliot
