- From: Bernard Aboba <aboba@internaut.com>
- Date: Sat, 08 Sep 2007 23:52:18 +0000
- To: Eric Rescorla <ekr@networkresonance.com>
- Cc: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>, ietf-http-auth@osafoundation.org, discuss@apps.ietf.org, saag@mit.edu, ietf@ietf.org, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
> I object to this procedure. > > This document has already had an IETF Last Call, where it failed to > achieve consensus. At this point, it doesn't need additional last > calls to "make sure that people agree with Sam", but rather to go back > to the authors to try to build support in the community. Not liking > the result of the previous Last Call is not a sufficient basis for > issuing another one. > > At some point in the future, it may be appropriate to issue another > consensus call, but since this is not a WG mailing list--indeed, the > IESG has twice declined to charter a WG in this area--nor are you the > chair, it doesn't seem to me that you have standing to do that. When > that time comes, I would expect the IESG to designate an appropriate > time and place. I agree with EKR here. Failed consensus is failed consensus. RFC 2026 does not support the process that has been recommended here.
Received on Sunday, 9 September 2007 08:47:45 UTC