Alain, I'm sorry but I missed the following in your original email from last week:
"We got about 1/3 support for 4rd-U and 2/3 for MAP." As an observer, this sounds like a rough consensus that you should be verifying on the mailing list, so you are exactly following the process of RFC 2418, despite Remi's assertions to the contrary. Thanks, John Sent from my iPhone > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Alain Durand > Sent: Monday, April 09, 2012 1:24 PM > To: [email protected] WG > Cc: [email protected]; Softwire Chairs > Subject: Re: [Softwires] Mailing list question to gauge consensus on > 4rd-U vs MAP > > Dear Softwire wg, > > The consensus call is closing in a few days. > > The two questions being asked are the same ones that were asked during > the meeting in Paris. > Those questions may or may not be perfect, you may or may not like > them, but they are the tool we have to gauge consensus (or lack > thereof) on the mailing list. So, If you have not yet expressed your > opinion answering both questions, now is the time to do it. > In IETF tradition, silence is consent. > > Alain, Softwires wg co-chair > > > > > On Apr 4, 2012, at 5:14 PM, 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 > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > > ------ > > > > > > ===================================================================== > > > > 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 > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > > -------- > > > > ===================================================================== > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > Softwires mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
