[Internal-cg] Comment received on the ICG forum

[Kavouss Arasteh]

No comments on the objection raised by Richard,
But pls kindly avoid to open a new and boring round of discussion on what
consensus signifies. You never reach any conclusion .
Kavouss

2015-10-15 14:25 GMT+02:00 Patrik Fältström <paf at frobbit.se>:

> On 6 Oct 2015, at 19:08, Jennifer Chung wrote:
>
> > Please find the comment received on the ICG forum, details below:
> >
> >
> > Tuesday 6 Oct: Richard Hill - "How are you defining consensus?" -
> >
> http://mm.ianacg.org/pipermail/icg-forum_ianacg.org/2015-October/000006.html
> >
> > Please let me know if you have any questions.
>
> Suggested description, to be confirmed by ICG:
>
> ICG do separate consensus for the content of the proposals from each one
> of the operational communities from consensus that the proposals are
> implementable (etc). ICG validates that the operational communities do have
> consensus for the proposals put forward to ICG and then seek consensus in
> ICG for the compatibility.
>
> In this process, we have separated the objections in three categories:
>
> - Comments that do believe NTIA made the wrong decision, which are out of
> scope for ICG
>
> - Comments that are on each OC proposal, which has consensus already
> within each OC, where ICG validate with the OC that the issue have been
> discussed already (that the correct process have been followed)
>
> - Comments that are on the ICG evaluation on interoperability and
> compatibility
>
> On the last point, after reviewing the public comments, the ICG has
> consensus that the proposals are compatible and interoperable.
>
>    Patrik Fältström
>    ICG Co-chair
>
> _______________________________________________
> Internal-cg mailing list
> Internal-cg at mm.ianacg.org
> http://mm.ianacg.org/mailman/listinfo/internal-cg_ianacg.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.ianacg.org/pipermail/internal-cg_ianacg.org/attachments/20151015/03c831df/attachment.html>