Deciding between two choices

[Carsten Bormann]

> [...] it's a decision, but [...]
> significant unhappiness [...]

That's maybe why we call it "rough consensus" and not "eternal bliss".

As a remote bystander, I was pleasantly surprised how smooth this 
process was.

Remember the Megaco coin...

(For those who weren't there -- the text vs. binary decision in megaco 
was done literally by flipping a coin.
Significant expressions of unhappiness later caused the chair to back 
off from this decision, and then both variants were put in the standard.
For no discernible technical reason whatsoever.
*That* makes me unhappy.)

We need to remember to spend less time on the inconsequential decisions 
that still have to be made.
((Solution space: Add coins to 2026bis (or use an RFC2777 style source 
of verifiable randomness, if that makes people happier).))

We also maybe need to get more scientific in the decisions that do have 
consequences.
((Compare the various candidate selection processes in ITU and IEEE.))
That approach certainly helped making some of the decisions in ROHC.

Gruesse, Carsten