At 01:43 02/07/2005, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
On Fri, Jul 01, 2005 at 11:07:47PM +0200, JFC (Jefsey) Morfin wrote:
> The list of "satisfied" is of ne real interest. The list of "disatistied"
> seem important enough to say there is no consensus.
No IETF consensus is required to accept or deny a registration for the
registry in question under the current rules; instead IESG approval is
required instead.
Agreed. But the question is now "does IETF think IESG was right". There is
no consensus. We should therefore stop arguing on HPH and get a more
peacefull and general debate. I prefer the "we have a generic problem"
approach to "you are dumb stupid to have (not) adopted that, because of RFC
n1 to nx". ...
And if there is no consensus, then there is also no consensus to
change RFC 2780, under which auspices the IESG acted....
It seems it is a second problem which could be addressed after the general one.
all the best.
jfc
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf