Indeed you are right, I'd forgotten about that.
On 4/24/12 12:05 PM, Eran Hammer wrote: > Barry did make a consensus call when this was originally raised. > > EH > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Peter Saint-Andre [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 9:53 AM >> To: Eran Hammer >> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [OAUTH-WG] Shepherd review of draft-ietf-oauth-v2- >> threatmodel >> > On 4/24/12 10:20 AM, Eran Hammer wrote: >>>> We've been kicking this can of silliness for months now because one >>>> person refuses to move on even in the face of otherwise unanimous >>>> consensus from the group. > > Hi Eran, > > Cans of silliness aside, I'd like to make a brief meta point: we don't vote. > So > consensus is not a matter of counting noses, it is a matter of addressing > valid > technical issues that people raise. I shall re-read this thread and related > earlier threads to see if the issues raised by Michael Thomas have been > answered, but if there are open issues then we need to address them. Now, > it might be that he hasn't accepted the answers provided, in which case he > might be "in the rough". That's the chairs' call. But it's not necessarily a > simple > matter of saying that one person disagrees therefore we can move on. > However, I think you know that anyway. :) > > Peter > _______________________________________________ OAuth mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/oauth
