> On 02/03/2020, 23:34, "ietf on behalf of Sander Steffann" <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx on behalf of sander@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am shocked by the declaration of consensus on draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming by Martin Vigoureux. There was much discussion going on about one aspect of the draft, and there was clearly no consensus amongst the participants. There are still questions that haven't
> been answered about even the applicability of the contested text, let alone addressed. Promised about for example reporting back on the impact on RIR policies have never been fulfilled. And those are just the two bits that concern me most personally.
>
> Steamrolling a draft through a working group completely undermines the whole idea of the IETF and greatly damages it trustworthiness and reliability. By bluntly declaring consensus despite all of the objections within two hours of the latest version of the draft being published I feel
> that Martin Vigoureux has lost the credibility as an AD. I strongly feel a resignation is in order at this point.
Sadly, I have no option but to second this request. After hundreds (literally) of emails that were highly contentious that directly relate to the change in question in that document, to declare consensus 2 hours - almost to the minute - after the changed document was published - before anyone has a chance to read - digest or respond to either agree or disagree with the change, is nothing short of mindblowing. The actions taken in the context of this draft bring in question the credibility of the consensus process as a whole and cast doubt on the credibility of the IETF as a standards body that operates the consensus principle, and as such, I feel they bring the IETF and the process into disrepute.
In my view, the only option here is to formally request that the AD resign with immediate effect.
Thanks
Andrew
