Re: Spring Appeal and [Errata Rejected] RFC8200 (6003)

[Lorenzo Colitti <[e-mail]>]

On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 5:56 AM Erik Kline <[e-mail]> wrote:

>     [b] risk inappropriately discarding the silent agreement of those
> who accept the current text.
>
> I agree with Suresh when, in his handling of erratum report 5933, he wrote:
>
>     "...it is impossible to tell after the fact if the proposed
> replacement text would have achieved consensus..."
>

Big +1 to this. The erratum process is not the right way to deal with a
contentious issue such as this one with strong opinions on both sides. That
process simply does not allow for enough dialogue to explore the
disagreements and reach consensus. Any outcome arising from that process,
to the people that disagree with it, would almost certainly likely appear
arbitrary and authority-based. It would be very divisive, when in fact what
is needed here is the opposite: a WG discussion to attempt to achieve
consensus on a compromise, or simply to make it clear to all parties that
there is no consensus to be found and that the IETF is unfortunately not
able to recommend any particular outcome.