On Consensus and Humming in the IETF
draft-resnick-on-consensus-00

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type None Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2013-01-28
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats
Expired & archived
pdf htmlized bibtex
Reviews
Additional URLs
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state Unknown state
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)

This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft can be found at
https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-resnick-on-consensus-00.txt

Abstract

The IETF has had a long tradition of doing its technical work through a consensus process, taking into account the different views among IETF participants and coming to (at least rough) consensus on technical matters. In particular, the IETF is supposed not to be run by a "majority rules" philosophy. This is why we engage in rituals like "humming" instead of voting. However, more and more of our actions are now indistinguishable from voting, and quite often we are letting the majority win the day. This document is a collection of thoughts on what rough consensus is, how we have gotten away from it, and the things we can do in order to really achieve rough consensus.

Authors

Pete Resnick (presnick@qti.qualcomm.com)

(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)