You have captured the intent. I'm pleased to make that change if the
community aggress with the approach that is specified.
Russ
At 12:35 PM 9/21/2009, Stephen Farrell wrote:
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
_______________________________________________
Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf