Re: [stir] Review of: draft-ietf-stir-rfc4474bis-10

["Peterson, Jon" <[e-mail]>]

>The idea that authors would seek working group consensus about whether
>to respond in detail to a detailed review is outside of my IETF
>experience.  I'm astonished at the very idea of it.

It is not at all outside of my experience to ask a working group if it
thinks that a set of objections (cast as questions or no) merit further
consideration. 

I will stress again that, from my initial response to your stir-passport
review, I immediately agreed that you had made some helpful comments in
there and that we would implement fixes for those. I am not going back on
that at all. Obviously, the working group will have the opportunity to
review a draft containing those fixes. All that we're discussing now is
the amount and character of discussion that needs to occur before that
step can be taken. If people feel like there's more discussion needed
before the editors can proceed, then by all means, let's have it. If not,
I see no reason to delay.

Jon Peterson
Neustar, Inc.