hi Tom,

a neutral point: as a person who were not in the venue (but only through
listening and jabber), i also heard it seemed some, never joining either
mail list or venue discussion, held up their hands. i doubt they care the
techniques itself.

it is a question mark if the comparable number shows there is no rough
consensus. but logically i do agree with Ralph, that it was hard to
conclude the rough consensus through the numbers. voting is surely never an
unbiased estimation method for the consensus. ;-)

regards,
maoke

2012/4/4 Tom Taylor <[email protected]>

> I have been advised privately by a couple of people that I erred in my
> description of relative support for MAP vs. 4rd-U at the meeting. Support
> for MAP was predominant, but not to the point of rough consensus.
>
> I was startled at the meeting by how much support 4rd-U got, given that
> Remi is the only one who defends it on the list. I guess that affected my
> judgement of the numbers -- it just looked like a room-full of hands,
> comparable to the showing for MAP.
>
> Sorry for the misdirection.
>
> Tom Taylor
> _______________________________________________
> Softwires mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
>
_______________________________________________
Softwires mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires

Reply via email to