Hi, On Sun, Nov 03, 2013 at 01:18:03PM +0100, Roger Jørgensen wrote:
I think your view on Consensus are a bit of with what alot of us other think, please go read https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-resnick-on-consensus/
Or a shorter answer, it's not about the number, it is about getting people to agree it is a doable solution even when they don't agree on all. Their biggest objections need to be addressed, and discussed.
I think Sander did that: address and discuss the objection Nick raised. From what I saw in the discussion, the main thing seems to be that Nick is assuming most LRHs are free-riders, while the authors of the proposal assume that there is interest among the LRHs to strengthen their ties to the NCC and pay a reasonable fee for that, except for a small subset who would not do that. We can't know who is right - without asking "most" of the LRHs, which I consider unreasonable - so in the end the chairs will have to decide whether they share the view that this is a too high risk, or whether they see it as one loud voice sticking to unreasonable objection - and that is fully in line with the draft you reference :-) Gert Doering -- just a LIR -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (0)89/32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279