On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 12:53 AM, Byron Ellacott <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Chris, > > On 08/11/2012, at 3:04 PM, Christopher Morrow <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 1:36 AM, Byron Ellacott <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Hi Chris, >>> >>> When did the WG reach consensus on adopting this draft? >> >> when it spent ~50 mesasages discussing it? >> it seems that, even if we abandon it in the end, discussing this over >> a draft is a good thing to do. > > When that discussion happened, the chairs declared a lack of consensus for > adoption: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sidr/current/msg05015.html >
ok, i suppose my point here is that there's a bunch of discussion, there's a draft that got chattered about quite a bit. having the wg talk about it a bit more formally (which could just wither away to nothing in the end) doesn't seem to hurt. > Have the chairs reconsidered that declaration of lack of WG consensus, or > adopted the draft despite a lack of WG consensus? > yes, apparently. > Perhaps there's a problem to be addressed, and if a discussion should happen > around that problem, a document describing the problem might be a more useful > way forward. > that was the thought. again, maybe in the end it ends up not getting published... like: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sidr-bogons it happens somewhat often, no harm though, near as I can tell. -chris _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
