%% You should probably cite rfc7282 instead of this I-D. @techreport{resnick-on-consensus-01, number = {draft-resnick-on-consensus-01}, type = {Internet-Draft}, institution = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, note = {Work in Progress}, url = {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-resnick-on-consensus/01/}, author = {Pete Resnick}, title = {{On Consensus and Humming in the IETF}}, pagetotal = 11, year = 2013, month = feb, day = 13, 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. Note: This document contains the musings of an individual. Right now, it is just some rough notes and has lots of holes that need to be filled in. Even if those holes are filled, in its current form, it is not intended to be published as an RFC, let alone being a BCP for a change of IETF policy. If it evolves into such a thing, great. If it simply sparks discussion as an Internet Draft, that's a perfectly fine outcome.}, }