From: Sander Steffann <sander@steffann.nl>
Message-Id: <C8417F71-D61E-42AC-831E-B85269D5D4A5@steffann.nl>
Content-Type: multipart/signed;
 boundary="Apple-Mail=_A813335C-330B-4709-A2C6-7FFC18E5C6B5";
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha256
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3594.4.19\))
Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2020 20:51:05 +0100
In-Reply-To: 
 <5518_1582908787_5E594573_5518_436_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A48DD1BCA@OPEXCAUBM43.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
Cc: SPRING WG List <spring@ietf.org>,
 draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming
 <draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming@ietf.org>,
 6man WG <ipv6@ietf.org>
To: bruno.decraene@orange.com
References: 
 <17421_1575566127_5DE93B2F_17421_93_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A48D1A3DA@OPEXCAUBM43.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
 <5518_1582908787_5E594573_5518_436_1_53C29892C857584299CBF5D05346208A48DD1BCA@OPEXCAUBM43.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
Archived-At: 
 <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spring/xa-0wBZNaCO5A9lLuqubzkaCyzQ>
Subject: Re: [spring] WGLC - draft-ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming
Precedence: list


--Apple-Mail=_A813335C-330B-4709-A2C6-7FFC18E5C6B5
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii

> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> D) formal decision to advance this document
> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> I'm listed as a contributor on this document (among 23 contributors).
> Even though I have zero specific write/modification privilege on the =
text in this document, and I'm not part of the authors email alias, this =
would not be ideal for me to take the decision to forward this document =
to the IESG. I've discussed this with our AD (Martin) and he agreed to =
make the formal decision to send the document to the next level. Thank =
you Martin.
> As an element of context, I handled this WG LC not for the fun of it =
or because I believed it would easy, but because we needed to advance =
this document and that Rob was not available to take that role.

Wait, what?!  There is no "we needed to advance this document" in the =
IETF or any other consensus based forum... Based on the discussions on =
the mailing list (including questions on why PSP is so important that we =
can't take it out for now which have never been clearly answered by the =
authors) I can't see you can possibly declare consensus.

If there is going to be an appeal I will certainly put my signature on =
it.

I also find the behaviour of the WG chairs does not befit their =
responsibilities.

Appalling.
Sander


--Apple-Mail=_A813335C-330B-4709-A2C6-7FFC18E5C6B5
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename=signature.asc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature;
	name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=YNG4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--Apple-Mail=_A813335C-330B-4709-A2C6-7FFC18E5C6B5--