Hi Dave,
I agree that procedure of ietf processes should be respected and
followed by all, and/or community should understand such difference in
process before asked its opinion. I hope your comments will be
considered by IETF and IAB in the future.
thanking you for your comments,
AB
--------------------------------------------------
From: Dave Crocker <dcrocker at bbiw.net>
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba at computer.org>
Cc: IAB <iab at iab.org>, IETF <ietf at ietf.org>
Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2012 08:50:10 -0700
Two weeks is normal process for spontaneous consensus calls?
When did the community approve that change in process?
No he didn't:
"Please send strong objections..."
This asserts a forceful bias against general comments and criticisms by
establishing a very high threshhold for relevance. While no, no one is
prevented from other kinds of postings, the bias is nonetheless
established.
Note that he didn't ask for support, although explicit support
statements are exactly what is required for IETF consensus calls, absent
a history to justify the kind of "default yes" assumption made in the
announcement. We don't have any such documented history for this
effort.
Would any of us guess that the community would support the document?
Sure. But guessing isn't the point.
That folks have chosen to ignore the stricture specified in the
announcement and to post public support shows how deeply ingrained our
model is. And, yeah, enough such postings overwhelm problems with the
last call wording...
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net