Suggest no change: #739 Assuring ISOC commitment to AdminRest

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



I believe #739 is a matter that requires ISOC to form an opinion - it is not something that the IETF needs to come to consensus about, and it should not affect the text of the BCP.

As Brian Carpenter said:

I'm not saying a bylaw change would be a bad thing, in due time.
But ISOC can get a Board motion through in about 2 weeks, whereas a bylaw
change takes several months. Making it a prerequisite would cause us
to lose precious time.

And the ISOC BoT has plenty of stuff on its plate just caring for the rest of the effects of this process, if I understand Steve Crocker correctly.


I suggest that we close this ticket as "no change required" - the issue will not be forgotten, but it should not affect this document.

                 Harald



_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]