A minor point inline, rest snipped
Tom Petch
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pete Resnick" <presnick(_at_)qti(_dot_)qualcomm(_dot_)com>
To: <dcrocker(_at_)bbiw(_dot_)net>
Cc: "IETF Discussion" <ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org>
Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2013 11:48 PM
Finally back to this original review.
On 10/6/13 7:03 PM, Dave Crocker wrote:
<snip>
Note that this portrays rough consensus as an "exception".
I don't understand this first sentence. How is it an exception?
Even
with the following text, I don't see the basis for claiming that it
might/would be seen as exceptional.
Maybe I need a different word. I didn't mean "exceptional" in the
sense
of "extraordinary" or "atypical". I simply meant it in the "exception
handling" sense: We work toward full agreement, but if there's still
disagreement, we undertake an alternative path. I'm open to
suggestions
for text.
Now, a conclusion of having only rough consensus relies heavily
on
the good judgement of the consensus caller. The group must
truly
consider and weigh an issue before the objection can be
dismissed as
being "in the rough". The chair of the working group in one of
these
In spite of being appealing to use here, I think that the phrase "in
the rough" is actually distracting
As I mentioned earlier, I think it is worth defining as the golf term,
since it is used quite frequently among IETFers nowadays.
I just saw this term used by an AD in a DISCUSS for the first time that
I can recall, and I have not a clue what he means (yes, I understand
golf but do not see the relevance). My guess is that the AD is flying a
kite, but would not expect that to be any more widely understood:-(
Tom Petch
<snip>
pr
--
Pete Resnick<http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. - +1 (858)651-4478