Last Call: <draft-resnick-on-consensus-05.txt> (On Consensus and Humming in the IETF) to Informational RFC
The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org> Mon, 07 October 2013 16:48 UTC
Return-Path: <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietf-announce@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-announce@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3113711E8104 for <ietf-announce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Oct 2013 09:48:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.289
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.289 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.311, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eEuqIA7Zssnd for <ietf-announce@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Oct 2013 09:48:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0531511E80FD for <ietf-announce@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Oct 2013 09:48:30 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Subject: Last Call: <draft-resnick-on-consensus-05.txt> (On Consensus and Humming in the IETF) to Informational RFC
X-Test-IDTracker: no
X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.80.p1
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Sender: iesg-secretary@ietf.org
Message-ID: <20131007164829.16131.73595.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 09:48:29 -0700
X-BeenThere: ietf-announce@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org
List-Id: "IETF announcement list. No discussions." <ietf-announce.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-announce>, <mailto:ietf-announce-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf-announce>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-announce@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-announce-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce>, <mailto:ietf-announce-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 16:48:35 -0000
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider the following document: - 'On Consensus and Humming in the IETF' <draft-resnick-on-consensus-05.txt> as Informational RFC The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2013-11-04. Exceptionally, comments may be sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting. Abstract The IETF has had a long tradition of doing its technical work through a consensus process, taking into account the different views among IETF participants and coming to (at least rough) consensus on technical matters. In particular, the IETF is supposed not to be run by a "majority rule" philosophy. This is why we engage in rituals like "humming" instead of voting. However, more and more of our actions are now indistinguishable from voting, and quite often we are letting the majority win the day, without consideration of minority concerns. This document is a collection of thoughts on what rough consensus is, how we have gotten away from it, and the things we can do in order to really achieve rough consensus. Note (to be removed before publication): This document is quite consciously being put forward as Informational. It does not propose to change any IETF processes and is therefore not a BCP. It is simply a collection of principles, hopefully around which the IETF can come to (at least rough) consensus. The file can be obtained via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-resnick-on-consensus/ IESG discussion can be tracked via http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-resnick-on-consensus/ballot/ No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.