Subject: Adelaide meeting (maybe); draft-floyd-cong-01.txt

From: Vern Paxson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 23:44:01 PST

I'd like to encourage discussion of this I-D during the next couple of
weeks.  (Also, we're now thinking it should be submitted for BCP rather
than Informational.)  Hari & Srini are working on an update to
draft-balakrishnan-cm-01.txt, namely splitting it into two documents
as previously discussed.  This should be out by the end of the week.

(If we don't have fruitful mailing list discussions shortly, then I think
it won't be worth holding a meeting in Adelaide, and instead focus on
cracking the whip post-Adelaide.)

		Vern

---

From: John Border <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 09:53:33 -0500

Vern,

    I'll take this opportunity to ask a question re IETF gathering of
consensus which I have been wondering about...

    When an I-D (or just commentary) is sent to a mailing list and there is no
reaction, it would dangerous to assume that no reaction means that everyone is
okay with the I-D (or comment).  But, I always sort of assumed that when an
I-D is sent to a mailing list with an explicit request for comments before
moving the document along that no reaction indicates consent.  Is this the way
it works?

    I think draft-floyd-cong-01.txt is ready as is.  But, sending a message to
the mailing list just to say I think it is ready doesn't feel right to me
since my opinion should have roughly equal weight with everyone else's opinion
but sending the message would seem to me like I was pushing my opinion ahead
of everyone else's opinion...

John Border
Hughes Network Systems