On Oct 7, 2013, at 3:34 PM, Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> wrote: > So I'd like to dispute Ted's point that by publishing a version of > resnick-on-consensus as an RFC, we will engrave its contents in stone. > If that's the case, we have an even deeper problem than misunderstandings > of rough consensus.
Right, I think what Ted is describing is a BCP, not an Informational RFC.
