In message <43E03996-6B10-4E56-8161-9DF0BDA67FE3_at_noao.edu>, Rob Seaman writes:
>The attached WP7A press release states that the working party has
>decided that more time is required to build consensus. It does not,
>however, suggest that any other proposals will be entertained.
Neither does it in any way bar new proposals.
I don't think there is even anything in the WP7A rules that would
allow them to bar new proposals, provided these were submitted
properly.
But I think you read their message wrong.
I don't think they said "We'll try to build concensus".
As I read it, they more or less told USA that their proposal was
nice and all that, but that since it did not come with a concensus
or majority, they ain't going to touch it.
The to weight, as I understand it, is therefore on USA and the
leap-second aware computer people.
With respect to the secrecy and lack of awareness of the ITU standards
I can only agree: IETF proved that standards work a lot better
when anyone easily can get hold of them and everybody can afford
to read them.
Poul-Henning
--
Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk_at_FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Received on Fri Nov 18 2005 - 04:33:13 PST