On 6/23/11 4:36 PM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
Greetings again. The subject line is an honest question, not a
gripe.
For those on the ietf@ mailing list, please see
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic/ballot/>.
In short, the IESG just approved publication of
draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic, even with what appears to be a
lack of consensus in the comments on the ietf@ mailing list. One AD
called it "pretty rough", but my quick count shows that it was not
rough at all: there were more people on the ietf@ against this than
in favor of it.
I can't speak for other IESG members, but I made a point of reading the
full text of every IETF LC message about this I-D, and I disagree with
the accuracy of your quick count. It's true that the Last Call did not
achieve unanimity or even smooth consensus, but my reading was that a
few folks were in the rough (although quite vocal) and that there was
rough consensus to publish. I would not have ballotted "No Objection"
otherwise. However, I freely admit that I might be wrong.
Peter
--
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf