Last Call Review of draft-resnick-on-consensus-05
review-resnick-on-consensus-05-secdir-lc-hutzelman-2013-10-31-00

Request Review of draft-resnick-on-consensus
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 07)
Type Last Call Review
Team Security Area Directorate (secdir)
Deadline 2013-11-04
Requested 2013-10-10
Authors Pete Resnick
Draft last updated 2013-10-31
Completed reviews Genart Last Call review of -05 by Russ Housley (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -06 by Russ Housley (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -05 by Jeffrey Hutzelman (diff)
Opsdir Telechat review of -06 by Carlos Pignataro (diff)
Assignment Reviewer Jeffrey Hutzelman
State Completed
Review review-resnick-on-consensus-05-secdir-lc-hutzelman-2013-10-31
Reviewed rev. 05 (document currently at 07)
Review result Ready
Review completed: 2013-10-31

Review
review-resnick-on-consensus-05-secdir-lc-hutzelman-2013-10-31

I have reviewed this document as part of the security directorate's 
ongoing effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the 
IESG.  These comments were written primarily for the benefit of the 
security area directors.  Document editors and WG chairs should treat 
these comments just like any other last call comments.

This is an Informational document which, to quote the abstract, examines
"what rough consensus is, how we have gotten away from it, and the
things we can do in order to really achieve rough consensus."

It's an excellent treatment of that issue, and one I look forward to
being able to cite as a reference when trying to explain to people what
rough consensus is and what it is not.  Like Pete, I've noticed a
growing trend toward voting and things that smell like voting, with
sometimes unfortunate results.  Hopefully this will prove an effective
tool in opposing that trend.


Publish this, please.

-- Jeff