Re: Future Handling of Blue Sheets

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

 



David:

The list of participants and their addresses are already part of the proceedings.  The incremental difference shows which participants signed in at each session.

Russ



On May 6, 2012, at 7:03 PM, David Morris wrote:

> 
> From my following of the topic, that concensus was really rough, in 
> particular the part about publishing the scans on-line. That represents
> a significant difference in ease access which I think required more than
> the very very rough concensus you seem to think you found.
> 
> On Sun, 6 May 2012, IETF Chair wrote:
> 
>> We have heard from many community participants, and consensus is quite rough on this topic.  The IESG discussed this thread and reached two conclusions:
>> 
>> (1) Rough consensus: an open and transparent standards process is more important to the IETF than privacy of blue sheet information.
>> 
>> (2) Rough consensus: inclusion of email addresses is a good way to distinguish participants with the same or similar names.
>> 
>> 
>> Based on these conclusions, the plan is to handle blue sheets as follows:
>> 
>>  - Continue to collect email addresses on blue sheets;
>> 
>>  - Scan the blue sheet and include the image in the proceedings for the WG session;
>> 
>>  - Add indication to top of the blue sheet so people know it will be part of the proceedings; and
>> 
>>  - Discard paper blue sheets after scanning.
>> 
>> 
>> On behalf of the IESG,
>>  Russ
>> 
>> 
> 




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