IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Tricky cross-area topics

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Sun, 06 October 2019 16:07 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9F83120073 for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 09:07:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.435
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.435 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS=3.335, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 gD3W29Z7zaSi for <wgchairs@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 09:07:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay.sandelman.ca (relay.cooperix.net [IPv6:2a01:7e00::f03c:91ff:feae:de77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26DD112004F for <wgchairs@ietf.org>; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 09:07:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dooku.sandelman.ca (unknown [82.117.217.154]) by relay.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7647A1F456; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 16:07:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by dooku.sandelman.ca (Postfix, from userid 179) id 16B3E2070; Sun, 6 Oct 2019 18:08:28 +0200 (CEST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com>
cc: "Salz, Rich" <rsalz@akamai.com>, IETF WG Chairs <wgchairs@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: Tricky cross-area topics
In-reply-to: <137da692-24ed-c3e0-1164-a9d92532d035@joelhalpern.com>
References: <77b22339-6a8e-8eaa-a695-724deb963dec@nostrum.com> <B5171FA2-F2B8-4BD6-BE9C-F669FCD86373@gmail.com> <6C35326B-7C1B-404F-AE1B-CFA9023CF82B@mnot.net> <1123.1570358631@dooku.sandelman.ca> <55214F7E-86D2-4333-B3BB-02CDB0B9A198@akamai.com> <7511.1570371820@dooku.sandelman.ca> <137da692-24ed-c3e0-1164-a9d92532d035@joelhalpern.com>
Comments: In-reply-to "Joel M. Halpern" <jmh@joelhalpern.com> message dated "Sun, 06 Oct 2019 10:37:08 -0400."
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6; nmh 1.6; GNU Emacs 24.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha256"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2019 18:08:28 +0200
Message-ID: <11999.1570378108@dooku.sandelman.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/wgchairs/_lFZxeTqGLw9YewsnvEnviWrhQg>
X-BeenThere: wgchairs@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Working Group Chairs <wgchairs.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/wgchairs/>
List-Post: <mailto:wgchairs@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wgchairs>, <mailto:wgchairs-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 06 Oct 2019 16:07:45 -0000

Joel M. Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> wrote:
    > But in no case that I know of is the shepherd's job to report whether
    > the WG process worked well.  the shepherd report does include whether
    > the consensus was rough, clear, ...  But that is NOT a report on
    > whether the process worked well.

My words were poor.
I mean what you said!

The point, though being, that the Shepherd is not determining consensus, but
just reporting on the flavour of it. 

-- 
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [ 
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        | network architect  [ 
]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email