----- Original Message ----- From: "Harald Tveit Alvestrand" <harald@alvestrand.no> > > True. Nearly a year ago, we attempted to publish > draft-iesg-vendor-extensions, to describe these problems in more detail - > but we failed to get that finished. I should probably get out more, but I wasn't familiar with this draft. I see that version 00 was announced. It looks to have been discussed in a couple of posts on ccamp (and mpls? but I didn't look), and revectored onto the main IETF discussion list, where it was the subject of two posts. The draft says "The initial version of this document was put together by the IESG", suggesting that they were asking for input or other forms of help, but that didn't happen. (In your opinion:) Was this a case of insufficient agreement, or a case of insufficient cycles? Or something else? Spencer