Yes, but this is a key aspect of the decision, so the WG should decide, nobody else.
Being asked for the affiliation is already telling the folks to say so. It should not be asked. Regards, Jordi -----Mensaje original----- De: Wojciech Dec <[email protected]> Responder a: <[email protected]> Fecha: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 11:36:23 +0200 Para: Jordi Palet Martinez <[email protected]>, Softwire Chairs <[email protected]> Asunto: Re: [Softwires] Mailing list question to gauge consensus on 4rd-U vs MAP >RFC2418 says: >" >The Working Group Chair is concerned with making forward progress > through a fair and open process, and has wide discretion in the > conduct of WG business." > >Also, it does not appear that you're forced to state your affiliation, if >you don't want to. > >-Woj. > >On 5 April 2012 11:28, JORDI PALET MARTINEZ <[email protected]> >wrote: > >I'm sorry, but I think the first question is wrong if we don't have one >more question at the end. > >My understanding is that it is up to the WG to decide if, in case one >solution is accepted for standards track, the other one need to be >withdraw from the WG instead of going to experimental or informational. I >don't think this decision can be taken by the chairs or ADs, and it must >be done now, otherwise it may be appealed later, so we will have extra >work, a new consensus poll, etc. > >Another point. In IETF we act as individuals, so why should we indicate >our affiliation ? > >The right question set must be: > >Question 1: Do you agree that the wg should put EITHER 4rd-U OR MAP (as a >whole) on the standard track, > >the other being published as experimental, informational or abandon by the >WG. >Answering YES to this question means you agree we cannot publish both as >standard track. >Answering NO to this question means you want to see both advance on the >standard track. > > >Your full name, your affiliation, your choice: YES or NO > > > > >Questions 2: Which one do you want to see placed on the Standards Track: >4rd-U or MAP? > > > >Your full name, your choice: 4rd-U or MAP > >Question 3: The remaining solution (the one NOT accepted by the consensus >of the WG) should be published as experimental, informational, or abandon >by the WG (so the authors can take other paths if they believe so). > > >Your full name, your choice: experimental, informational or abandon. > > > > >Regards, >Jordi > > > > > > >-----Mensaje original----- >De: Jun Xu <[email protected]> >Responder a: <[email protected]> >Fecha: Thu, 5 Apr 2012 17:14:08 +0800 >Para: "[email protected] WG" <[email protected]>, ><[email protected]>, Softwire Chairs <[email protected]> >Asunto: Re: [Softwires] Mailing list question to gauge consensus on 4rd-U >vs MAP > >>Hi, >> >>On Apr 5, 2012, at 5:14 AM, Alain Durand wrote: >> >>> Dear Softwire wg members: >>> >>> At the Paris IETF Softwire meeting, we had presentations on MAP (taken >>>as a whole) and >>> 4rd-U. We got very strong feedback that we needed to select one >>> solution to cover that full stateless case, not two, and that we should >>>make this >>> decision relatively quickly. >>> >>> During Paris meeting, we asked the following additional question: >>> Do you prefer MAP or 4rd-U? >>> We got about 1/3 support for 4rd-U and 2/3 for MAP. >>> >>> The real gauge of consensus is the mailing list, so we would like >>> to ask the same questions to the list. >>> >>> ===================================================================== >>> Question 1: Do you agree that the wg should put EITHER 4rd-U OR MAP (as >>>a whole) on the standard track, >>> the other being published as experimental or informational. >>> Answering YES to this question means you agree we cannot publish both >>>as standard track. >>> Answering NO to this question means you want to see both advance on the >>>standard track. >>> >>> >>>------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>- >>>--- >>> Your full name, your affiliation, your choice: YES or NO >>> >>>------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>- >>>--- >>Jun Xu, Cisco, Choice: YES >>> >>> >>> ===================================================================== >>> >>> Questions 2: Which one do you want to see placed on the Standards >>>Track: >>> 4rd-U or MAP? >>> >>> >>>------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>- >>>----- >>> Your full name, your affiliation, your choice: 4rd-U or MAP >>> >>>------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>- >>>----- >>Jun Xu, Cisco, Choice: MAP >>> >>> ===================================================================== >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> Please fill out the following form and reply to the list >>> by Wednesday 4/10 5pm EDT. >>> >>> Note: Use this thread ONLY for expressing your support to >>> one OR the other, and redirect any discussions to other threads. >>> That would help up gauge consensus. >>> >>> Alain & Yong. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Softwires mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires >> >>Jun Xu >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Softwires mailing list >>[email protected] >>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires > > > > > >********************************************** >IPv4 is over >Are you ready for the new Internet ? >http://www.consulintel.es >The IPv6 Company > >This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or >confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the >individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware >that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this >information, including attached files, is prohibited. > > > >_______________________________________________ >Softwires mailing list >[email protected] >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires > > > > > > ********************************************** IPv4 is over Are you ready for the new Internet ? http://www.consulintel.es The IPv6 Company This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited. _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
