On Jun 24, 2011, at 1:54 PM, Keith Moore wrote: > On Jun 24, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Doug Barton wrote: > >>> I've been reviewing the WGLC comments. I haven't finished doing so yet, >>> but so far my impression is that the discussion was both thorough and >>> well-organized. >> >> You might want to go further back in the archives than just the LC. There was quite a bit of discussion on both drafts. > > I've read some of it, and participated in some of the discussion for -advisory. Though my immediate question has been whether the WG really had rough consensus, and I don't think the other WG discussion matters too much in gauging that. The question of what the wg thought at the time of the wg last call is supposed to be captured in the document shepherd writeup. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic/history/ I belive that in the case of this documents the unresolvable but understood objections present in the wg process around this document are specifically called out. > Keith > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > Ietf@xxxxxxxx > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf