Doug, I did not refer to your message. The only two responses to the October 10 Last Call regarding draft-weil-shared-transition-space-request-09 were: - https://www.ietf.org/ibin/c5i?mid=6&rid=49&gid=0&k1=933&k2=60292&tid=1322579909 - https://www.ietf.org/ibin/c5i?mid=6&rid=49&gid=0&k1=933&k2=59923&tid=1322579994 The message that you reference below, as well as many other messages, were in response to a an August 19 Last call regarding draft-weil-shared-transition-space-request-03. Many of the problems pointed out in that last call were addressed between versions 03 and 09 of the document. However, many were not. Therefore, I summarized what I believed to be the outstanding issues in the message that I posted last night. If I missed any outstanding issues, please add to the list. I hope that this helps. Ron > -----Original Message----- > From: Doug Barton [mailto:dougb@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Monday, November 28, 2011 10:18 PM > To: Brian E Carpenter > Cc: Ronald Bonica; IESG IESG; IETF Discussion > Subject: Re: Consensus Call: draft-weil-shared-transition-space-request > [snip] > > ... and a meta-issue for Ron. I saw a lot more opposition to the > document in the last call than you did. Are you by any chance referring > to my message at > https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/current/msg69583.html below? > If so, I guess I needed to actually say the words, "I oppose > publication > of this document?" If I wasn't clear, sorry. > > > Doug > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf