Re: [trill] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-trill-oam-framework-00

Dan,

	Thanks!

	As explained in separate mail, I was confused by the order of the process in
this case (apparently using the meeting to confirm the - somewhat feeble - support
from the mailing list), in combination with having entirely missed the consensus call
on the mailing list.

	I also agree that the process was followed, if in a somewhat contorted way.

--
Eric

-----Original Message-----
From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:dromasca@avaya.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 4:47 AM
To: Donald Eastlake; Eric Gray
Cc: rdroms.ietf@gmail.com; TRILL Working Group
Subject: RE: [trill]http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-trill-oam-framework-00
Importance: High

Hi,

I agree with Donald. It looks to me that the proper process was followed here, as the mail list call for consensus issued on 10/26 was asking 'Please indicate whether or not you think this is reasonable as a WG document in the next week or so.' The five responses that followed on the mail list were all in support. The consensus call in the room at
IETF-85 can be considered as a last opportunity to express concerns, which again resulted in favorable consensus. 

Regards,

Dan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: trill-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:trill-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf 
> Of Donald Eastlake
> Sent: Wednesday, November 14, 2012 1:41 AM
> To: Eric Gray
> Cc: Ralph Droms (rdroms.ietf@gmail.com); TRILL Working Group
> Subject: Re: [trill]http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-trill-oam-
> framework-00
> 
> Hi Eric,
> 
> The call by the Chairs to make this OAM framework draft a WG draft was 
> issued here http://www.ietf.org/mail- 
> archive/web/trill/current/msg05348.html
> 
> Technically, I could argue that there was no need to wait until the WG 
> meeting before making a determination but we did so the consensus in
the
> room merely ratified the consensus on the mailing list.
> 
> Thanks,
> Donald
> =============================
>  Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
>  155 Beaver Street, Milford, MA 01757 USA  d3e3e3@gmail.com
> 
> 
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 6:34 PM, Eric Gray <eric.gray@ericsson.com>
> wrote:
> > Donald,
> >
> >
> >
> >                 I am confused about something.
> >
> >
> >
> >                 During the TRILL WG meeting, I believe we had a 
> > consensus of the room
> >
> > to adopt the draft "draft-salam-trill-oam-framework" as a working 
> > group draft.
> >
> >
> >
> >                 It is the case that a "consensus of the room" is not 
> > sufficient to conclude
> >
> > working group consensus has been achieved.  The room consensus needs 
> > to be
> >
> > confirmed on the mailing list - usually with a one or two week poll.
> >
> >
> >
> >                 Yet draft-salam-trill-oam-framework has been posted
as
> > a working group
> >
> > draft (under the name shown in the subject line of this message).
> >
> >
> >
> >                 I have looked though my mail and do not see an 
> > announcement of any
> >
> > such poll for consensus
> >
> >
> >
> >                 Did the poll confirming the sense of the room
happen,
> > or have we had
> >
> > a bit of a slip-up?
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Eric
> _______________________________________________
> trill mailing list
> trill@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trill