On 12/12/04 at 9:06 PM +0100, Bert (Bert) Wijnen wrote:
This debate between John and Pete seems to be at such an abstract meta level to me, that I have difficulty to try and see what it means for the IAS BCP doc that I thinkwe are trying to get consensus on.
As I said, it could be just me, but I seem unable to map it to any issue(s) with the curremt text in rev 02 of the doc.
Ignoring John's caricature of my position: I think I am suggesting an addition to the current BCP which more or less says:
"This BCP will take effect upon adoption of the BCP by the IESG and the concurrent <<insert thing that ISOC does which codifies in some interesting way the adoption of the relationship by ISOC>>"
I also suggested to insert for the part in <<>>:
"adoption of an ISOC by-law signifying the adoption of the principles laid out in this BCP."
That's it.
pr -- Pete Resnick <http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/> QUALCOMM Incorporated
_______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf