> -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Shmuel Metz > Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 5:09 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [marf] DISCUSS on draft-ietf-marf-redaction-04 > > A procedural question: is it necessary for multiple WG members to > respond with "+1" to avoid an assumption of lack of interest? I tend to > post only in response to drafts that I consider problematical or to > issues that others have raised.
The IETF likes to see a record of consensus and support for decisions it makes, including publication of documents. A "+1" is better than nothing, but ideal would be "I've read this, I agree with what it says, and I believe it should go forward to publication" or words to that effect. Absent that, the statement of consensus or support for a document is far weaker, and someone would be within his/her rights to claim there's no indication of support justifying publication. In short, silent reviewers don't help anyone. -MSK _______________________________________________ marf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/marf
