Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCWeb

["DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <[e-mail]>]

While I don't believe the WG would be positive on that, I do not believe that question has been put to a consensus call. So I would question the word specifically. 

If you still believe it so, please tell me when you think the WG decided this.

Keith 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtcweb [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Ted Lemon
> Sent: 28 November 2013 17:03
> To: Dave Crocker
> Cc: [e-mail]; Eliot Lear; 
> [e-mail]; Eric Burger; IETF Discussion
> Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCWeb
> 
> On Nov 28, 2013, at 11:29 AM, Dave Crocker <[e-mail]> wrote:
> > As merely one obvious example, people can simply be tired of the 
> > impasse and eagerly seek progress and be willing to settle on any 
> > mechanism they think will fairly break it -- even if it 
> works against 
> > the outcome they prefer.
> 
> The one tidbit you may be missing is that the working group 
> specifically chose not to do a coin toss.   So "willing to 
> settle for any mechanism" clearly doesn't apply in this case.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>