Re: path forward with RFC 3932bis

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

 



Jari,

Aaron asked me to forward a comment I made on the IRSG list:

The text below seems to almost encourage the IESG to do an IETF last
call in the event of a dispute with the IRSG as to the content of an
IESG note. That LC should be limited to the content of the IESG note
I guess, and not to determine if the IETF have consensus on the
document as a whole.

If that's a reasonable interpretation I'd suggest changing as follows:

OLD:
   The dialogue should not take more than six weeks.  This period of
   time allows the IESG to conduct an IETF Last Call to determine
   community consensus if desired.
NEW:
   The dialogue should not take more than six weeks.  This period of
   time allows the IESG to conduct an IETF Last Call on the content
   of the proposed IESG note (and not on the document as a whole)
   to determine community consensus if desired.

Regards,
Stephen.
_______________________________________________

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

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