IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ianaplan] on considering consensus

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 25 August 2015 05:42 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F162F1A897E for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 22:42:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZroNCzfReMgD for <ianaplan@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 22:42:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pd0-x232.google.com (mail-pd0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 616261A0193 for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 22:42:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pdbfa8 with SMTP id fa8so62498644pdb.1 for <ianaplan@ietf.org>; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 22:42:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:organization:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=cEgpTHkkD4ORhVXibFpEnyXaq3KEMEfHhHVTvbf/vsw=; b=jw5ravDUA/La/ZRl8sWvYRLQWCSQlCi173OxBEg4GlgInHhB05QO7TJoZDUo+RaLjg jz0z3t9ZYBiICB2eYgPTHXieCYpvymmEQM3kSOx1+vzYg09/DIogHwWmnMUCEFLksXw2 vFEy1eo5wGJn28ttT9eqCHGYfCe/FXXVb4S1VKmuhm4ahZYlIsXTKWCrYee7Nf8w3NZG MWZoCisC4XUNByfemQvjXGBOfx5OxyRcAa9BTMSs1a6rdN/HkaPwIIUaK1lt8ZU5f2o+ iGWb5M0h7msR8LG8pBWaWH70kv4WkfBKY1SOKBZ01yrmkKoLdqRLdaXQeOPC38dfQcAf bvnA==
X-Received: by 10.70.20.97 with SMTP id m1mr48803260pde.18.1440481331846; Mon, 24 Aug 2015 22:42:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e007:6b5e:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781? ([2406:e007:6b5e:1:28cc:dc4c:9703:6781]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id yt9sm19510979pac.32.2015.08.24.22.42.08 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 24 Aug 2015 22:42:10 -0700 (PDT)
To: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, "Leslie Daigle (TCE)" <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com>, Marc Blanchet <marc.blanchet@viagenie.ca>
References: <55DBFC39.5000701@cisco.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Organization: University of Auckland
Message-ID: <55DC0030.5080809@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 17:42:08 +1200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <55DBFC39.5000701@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ianaplan/oncoYvSh4F9wZgUNkPPSybO49rU>
Cc: "ianaplan@ietf.org" <ianaplan@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] on considering consensus
X-BeenThere: ianaplan@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IANA Plan <ianaplan.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ianaplan>, <mailto:ianaplan-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ianaplan/>
List-Post: <mailto:ianaplan@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ianaplan-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan>, <mailto:ianaplan-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 05:42:14 -0000

On 25/08/2015 17:25, Eliot Lear wrote:
> Hi Leslie & Marc,
> 
> I realize I'm being a bit of a pain on this one and I am sorry this
> weights on you two, but...  I have two concerns about the text that you
> put out as a proposed edit:
> 
> 1.  The first is that apart from saying that some haven't read the
> proposal, Richard hasn't actually raised a substantial objection that we
> can discuss.  Richard also raised a process issue that I believe Andrew
> dispensed with.
> 
> 2.  While we do confirm consensus in mailing lists, I would just ask
> that you not forget the 15 or so people who took the time to participate
> in the interim meeting and worked to come to unanimous agreement on the
> previous text.
> 
> As such, I would ask that we revert to the text agreed to by the interim.

We have this rule that rough consensus is established on the list.

And I would say the problem with the meeting text is that journalists
will spin it to say that the IETF agrees with the whole plan. I don't think
we have any evidence of that.

    Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email