[occi-wg] confusion about status of link / headers
andrewx.edmonds at intel.com
Mon Oct 19 12:24:26 CDT 2009
+1 to the IETF model - it's lightweight and simple
From: occi-wg-bounces at ogf.org [mailto:occi-wg-bounces at ogf.org] On Behalf Of Alexis Richardson
Sent: 19 October 2009 17:53
To: Sam Johnston
Cc: Tim Bray; occi-wg at ogf.org
Subject: Re: [occi-wg] confusion about status of link / headers
Well it sounds like at least three people, including myself, prefer
the IETF model.
Any other views?
On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 5:50 PM, Sam Johnston <samj at samj.net> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 6:42 PM, Alexis Richardson
> <alexis.richardson at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thank-you. Quick question below...
>> On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 5:37 PM, Tim Bray <Tim.Bray at sun.com> wrote:
>> >> Does anyone have any alternative suggestions? We need a simple model
>> >> for reaching consensus here, that grows the community and adoption.
>> > In practice, I've had experience with three processes; ...
>> > ...
>> > In the W3C, you argue for a
>> > while and then the chair (co-chairs usually) assert what the consensus
>> > is.
>> > Informally consensus is considered to be the absence of sustained
>> > intense
>> > reasonable resistance. If you disagree you appeal to the Area Director,
>> > the
>> > IESG, the IAB and eventually the Internet Society (I may have that
>> > appeal
>> > chain out of order).
>> Did you mean 'IETF' for this last item?
> Yes. Note that it's also my strong preference to follow the IETF's example,
> whereby discussion focusing on the technical merits of each alternative
> would continue until rough consensus is reached (as called by the chairs)
> with an appeal chain through the OGF in the unlikely event that it is
> The key thing is to stay focused on the technical pros and cons and leave
> all the other cruft (such as unhelpful REST religious debates) at the door.
occi-wg mailing list
occi-wg at ogf.org
Intel Ireland Limited (Branch)
Collinstown Industrial Park, Leixlip, County Kildare, Ireland
Registered Number: E902934
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
More information about the occi-wg