[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

To: Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine <brunner@nic-naa.net>
Cc: Ted Hardie <hardie@qualcomm.com>, ietf-provreg@cafax.se, iesg@ietf.org, brunner@nic-naa.net
From: Edward Lewis <edlewis@arin.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 14:48:30 -0800
In-Reply-To: <200303191906.h2JJ6PGL023423@nic-naa.net>
Sender: owner-ietf-provreg@cafax.se
Subject: Re: [ietf-provreg] EPP, data, actors, and access

At 14:06 -0500 3/19/03, Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine wrote:
>>  I think we have identified ways forward on this issue in this week ...
>I've no idea what this means. We (possibly a different value of "we")
>thought we were getting consensus around a proposal (<dcp> manditory),
>some time prior to this week, e.g., last week.

We = some set of people.  It's not important yet, what is important 
is whether or not the WG as a whole also agrees.

Let's not worry about the source of the proposal, let's worry about 
the quality of the proposal.

During the face to face meeting on Thursday, we will systemically not 
come to a conclusion.  The best use of the time is as a "bull" 
session, to throw ideas back and forth for some amount of time (the 
amount given is a function of the relative usefulness of the 
conversation).  At the end of the bull session, it will be the job of 
the chairs to prepare something to put in the list and to then begin 
the process of drafting an approach acceptable to the group as a 

Consensus is not achieved by voting, but by arriving at a set of 
statements that are acceptable to (nearly) all with a stake - WG 
members, IESG, and the silent masses following this work.  Let's put 
it this way, if we want to rent a car, if 80% of the WG wants to 
require a red one and the other 20% wants blue, we'll settle on 
wanting to just rent a car.

>As to timing of meetings, I don't attend meetings held in belligerant states
>during periods of belligerency. It is dangerous, it requires acts of active
>cooperation with the security regimes of the belligerant state(s), and is
>an endorsement of belligerency. I'd rather not.

Absence is perfectly permissible, after all the IETF is a volunteer 
organization.  The sentiment expressed is that it would have been 
keen to have you in attendance so that we could more quickly arrive 
at a common understanding of the problem.  It is our fault if you 
feel the need to defend your choice not to travel.  (I'm *not* going 
to define "our." ;))

Edward Lewis                                          +1-703-227-9854
ARIN Research Engineer

Home | Date list | Subject list