>>> I would say that it seems we have not been following the processes that
>>> should be followed. This has happened repeatedly over time, for this
>>> very same topic. The process seems to be biased, and thus unfair to the
>>> rest of the wg participants.
>> 
>> Which process are you talking about? Is that documented in an RFC?
> 
> Yes: RFC2026 and RFC2418.

More specifically?
And if you feel you need to the conflict resolution and appeals process is 
described in rfc2026, section 6.5.

>> You seem to take it on yourself to represent the "rest of the wg 
>> participants", but from my perspective it looks like a few very loud voices.
> 
> I don't. Again: unless folks get consensus to update RFC8200, thy should
> comply with it. The onus is on them, not on us asking folks to comply
> with existing standards.

Yes, we have heard your position on this now.
There is of course a lot more nuance to this argument.

Best regards,
Ole
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring

Reply via email to