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

From: Vern Paxson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 10:10:55 PST

>     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?

Good question.  Wearing my AD hat for a moment, it's the role of the chair
to judge the working group's consensus.  For a document greeted with silence,
the chair will generally factor in indications from the group's past
discussions.  If the chair is uncertain, then they might explicitly ask the
WG whether there's support for the document.

Also, for standards-track documents, if the chair misreads the consensus,
then that can be pointed out by WG members during the IETF last call.

>     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...

Both as a chair and as an AD, I welcome "I support this document going
forward" messages, as they confirm that someone has given thought to
the document and believes it's on course, and also can act as a spur to
others who think the document isn't ready to voice their dissent.

		Vern