Re: call for ideas: tail-heavy IETF process

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

 



On May 15, 2013, at 12:36 PM, Joe Touch <touch@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> I'm impressed that you have such a specific interpretation that this
> criteria refers to the entire document, even when it talks about the
> "feature of a protocol".

"The motivation for a feature of a protocol is not clear enough."   What's ambiguous or subject to interpretation about that?   The commentary exactly echoes what I said.   This does not mean that all lacks of clarity are not DISCUSS criteria: only that a lack of clarity with respect to motivation is not.






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