The proposal discussed at the interim involves the Liaison role and the triage report(s) being a consensus opinion from whichever FATT members participate with their names signed.
All WG activity has always been non-blocked on FATT input, and hinges entirely on working group consensus to do anything with FATT feedback at all. This goal is always to solicit rigorous analysis as input to regular working group consensus activity On Mon, Oct 21, 2024, 3:42 PM Stephen Farrell <stephen.farr...@cs.tcd.ie> wrote: > > > On 21/10/2024 20:37, Deirdre Connolly wrote: > > Yes, the updated proposal at the interim describes how all participants > in > > any document triage sign on to the recommendation / triage (or lack > > thereof). > > Sorry to be pernickity, but does "sign on" mean we get to know > who made what comments? Or that they all append all names and > claim they all agree with all comments? (Neither seems that > good to me fwiw.) > > > The WG can decide to block the WGLC or any other document work > > based on the recommendations being fulfilled, or not. > > Ah, so this will be written down but hasn't been yet - is that > it? If so, that's fine and I look forward to seeing a draft > for review. > > S. > > PS: It'd be good if it were easier to distinguish what's a > moving target and what's been agreed. As an FYI, your earlier > email had the tone of "this is how it is" not "this is what > we're working on" which seems to be the case. > > > >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list -- tls@ietf.org To unsubscribe send an email to tls-le...@ietf.org
