IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Rfced-future] WGLC Review of the draft

Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com> Tue, 04 January 2022 19:30 UTC

Return-Path: <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B8DC3A1F35 for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 11:30:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.813
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.813 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.714, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 Mdsfu0h-XbSl for <rfced-future@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 11:30:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pg1-x533.google.com (mail-pg1-x533.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::533]) (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 62F053A07E9 for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 11:30:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pg1-x533.google.com with SMTP id i8so25048259pgt.13 for <rfced-future@iab.org>; Tue, 04 Jan 2022 11:30:41 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=DoAYyIoc8HJwOJy7hE6ohYUHgLedoMATmTW+jKc2vfg=; b=MByEUoA65VJwEQFmjR0adRZ1vd+CV3xu6oRjtNk3qaCVQeS+SXuNln/uCFFmqAcjhI Xxkmig0AgjTRYpXY4SS26mKvf+N7vjTVuKN93TJJCxXYKzRImI1nvkFcvMmuW/zNZfMh NMawyJb4Se9tjBF9qkchzCCIoEee/SVNKrCM+JuoHBjftgzbK87eQ0cw7gmN0nAnlU53 azB+X4LXobMNufrcVnFyioONw73NS1eNanDN6gY9CxuxFnRcLdXOoU56tHmoowcc+CM1 AY3PRPYe4sTVRxPOP89spbxUelV3pqBsexEvQfeq40MkmmoXEY1R9b6uDCAHYHMr23fy MAcA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=DoAYyIoc8HJwOJy7hE6ohYUHgLedoMATmTW+jKc2vfg=; b=CP7RvT4upkXr5uj6Vrxpl23Q93z7ByE2mufX5GtnTZtI2BCht/9Ontsq0cNdRnlImC GauEoMmj4jAUJLf/JpADZ/scAB1B6Q+g/iMuBAbThRrP/XN/LcOa64KETl87cnBzKkcv +LW7039trN/nfFVuFC6FrTh5Tp/7+z8RJex7UKsA/59Fn/NkBob2zRspuQ8GtM1q4zuX pnkcQVs2LhEx3jzV+Uvaw4gAVODp6w9OKmMS5NTF7gz2Kt4PJKY1diGMx/o3ZnjJnwvh C+m5Q8/MxYY6AYzC2vVj21Kd3NMU+uI6D5wUb3nieKp2pz8LLxD11BeqTkVC4Eq9tt7c 1vFQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5328sv/OZM8i7t8DIGNyhC2j/g0Ad8cIz6XBtMtFFutmBw0UvuiY SFaD55YgGAkIGYd0U3O8H1ZvN3Vl0VzDmA==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwk8OizxpHi+VSLVAKiHM4UekIKwNPSqAYICb3jVMBOdxp8xoLayymFTNUVvE7PCsPedH1R8w==
X-Received: by 2002:a63:854a:: with SMTP id u71mr44996023pgd.201.1641324638799; Tue, 04 Jan 2022 11:30:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?IPv6:2406:e003:1071:1701:db7:d041:a2d:ce65? ([2406:e003:1071:1701:db7:d041:a2d:ce65]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ls7sm138579pjb.11.2022.01.04.11.30.36 for <rfced-future@iab.org> (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 04 Jan 2022 11:30:38 -0800 (PST)
To: rfced-future@iab.org
References: <CABcZeBO3-q+SMTFNZyeC50eghFs1CJNSLojmr1Zip1g_nsGZHQ@mail.gmail.com> <d7ce7879-2324-69d1-0770-e104aff6c68c@stpeter.im> <CABcZeBMtZUa9cdr6a7znjdMY3UwNPpg2d0d4KwosfmzE1KqmxQ@mail.gmail.com> <87ea0c57-3269-d8ea-90ec-0f91096f1d28@nthpermutation.com>
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <03f489e1-1070-bbeb-c6fa-1b1dd1bb60b9@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2022 08:30:33 +1300
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <87ea0c57-3269-d8ea-90ec-0f91096f1d28@nthpermutation.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rfced-future/OosEIFp3YK1QjZgt9o019vtwCJE>
Subject: Re: [Rfced-future] WGLC Review of the draft
X-BeenThere: rfced-future@iab.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: RFC Editor Future Development Program <rfced-future.iab.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/options/rfced-future>, <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rfced-future/>
List-Post: <mailto:rfced-future@iab.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.iab.org/mailman/listinfo/rfced-future>, <mailto:rfced-future-request@iab.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 04 Jan 2022 19:30:44 -0000

On 05-Jan-22 07:52, Michael StJohns wrote:
...
> What I think EKR is saying - and let me use a concrete example - is that if 5 people that think changing the numbering system of the RFC series proposes that in the RSWG, gets RSWG consensus, but then the community overwhelmingly thinks that's a bad idea - well so what?   

I'm confused. The RSWG is open to participation by anybody. How is the RSAB going to conclude that the rough consensus of the community as a whole is different from the rough consensus of a WG open to the community as a whole?

I see an infinite regression here. It's communities all the way down.

    Brian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email