W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > April to June 2014

Re: Framing the proxy discussion

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 10:31:53 +1000
Cc: ietf-http-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <E7194274-A486-4ADD-92F5-7B3B375481BC@mnot.net>
To: K.Morgan@iaea.org

On 23 Jun 2014, at 9:10 pm, K.Morgan@iaea.org wrote:

> On Monday,23 June 2014 10:21, mnot@mnot.net wrote:
> > Also, a gentle reminder - we make decisions based upon technical arguments
> > ("rough consensus and running code"), not voting. So repeating an argument
> > or "+1-ing" it only adds to noise, it doesn't help your case. Please have a read
> > of <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-resnick-on-consensus> if this is new to you.
>  
> That link seems to be broken.  Here's a link to the latest draft I could find [1]. Reading it again was a good reminder for me of the IETF process.

Probably because it was transitioning between AUTH48 and being published:
  http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7282


> From Section 6 of [1]: "... you can have rough consensus with issues that have been purposely dismissed, but not ones that have been ignored. ... Even if no particular person is still standing up for an issue, that doesn't mean an issue can be ignored."
>  
> What should you do if you feel like a particular issue is being ignored on the mailing list?  Open an issue in the issue tracker?

That's one way to do it. You can also raise it as an issue in WGLC and/or IETF LC.

Cheers,

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 24 June 2014 00:32:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:31 UTC