Re: Hum theatre

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Thu, 07 November 2013 17:40 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3D6021E8147 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Nov 2013 09:40:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.397
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.397 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.202, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 C17i+GNdoTCo for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 7 Nov 2013 09:40:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 614E021E81C2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 7 Nov 2013 09:39:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [31.133.176.53] (dhcp-b035.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.176.53]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id rA7HdssN013305 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Thu, 7 Nov 2013 09:39:58 -0800
Message-ID: <527BD053.1050504@dcrocker.net>
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2013 09:39:31 -0800
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Randy Bush <randy@psg.com>, Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
Subject: Re: Hum theatre
References: <527AF986.4090504@dcrocker.net> <CAHBU6iuDXQok_QRZe7BL__Vmkn447vUCSViDgrVkaedKAHcnfw@mail.gmail.com> <m2bo1w29zw.wl%randy@psg.com> <527B3F62.3030005@qti.qualcomm.com> <m27gck194s.wl%randy@psg.com>
In-Reply-To: <m27gck194s.wl%randy@psg.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.66]); Thu, 07 Nov 2013 09:39:58 -0800 (PST)
Cc: IETF Disgust <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2013 17:40:10 -0000

On 11/7/2013 8:14 AM, Randy Bush wrote:
>> But Russ didn't ask for a "feeling". Russ said that he was asking about
>> consensus, and Tim heard that the result of those hums *were* the IETF
>> coming to consensus.
>
> i took it as the consensus of the *room*, and it would be taken to the
> lists to be nibbled to death by ducks.


That's nice.

Does recitation of your personal interpretation mean that it is 
irrelevant that others interpreted differently?   I've already heard one 
senior participant promise to use the results of the hum as leverage for 
working group activity.

Or do you mean that it is irrelevant that it was conducted in a manner 
that /guaranteed/ it would be interpreted differently?  That would imply 
that shared understanding of a strategic position for the IETF doesn't 
matter.

d/


-- 
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net