Re: Last Call: <draft-secretaries-good-practices-06.txt> (IETF Working Groups' Secretaries) to Best Current Practice

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

 



On 09/12/2014 12:41, Adrian Farrel wrote:
>>> Section 6:
>>>    Nevertheless, while the WG Chairs may delegate a number of tasks to
>>>    the Secretary, they maintain the overall responsibility and
>>>    accountability over the WG and the decisions and actions that are
>>>    taken.
>> Which is good stuff, like most of the content. I think the
>> argument is not about the quality of the draft, but about
>> whether it needs to be a BCP.
> 
> If only the "argument" was founded on reading the draft!

No, founded on reading the subject line of the Last Call message.
It seems that I missed a "downgrade" of the Last Call.

I don't object to this as Informational.

  Brian


> 
> Network Working Group                                      M. Vigoureux
> Internet Draft                                           Alcatel-Lucent
> Intended status: Informational                                  D. King
> Expires: May 2015                                    Old Dog Consulting
>                                                            C. Pignataro
>                                                     Cisco Systems, Inc.
> 
>                                                       November 11, 2014
> 
>                      IETF Working Groups' Secretaries
>                     draft-secretaries-good-practices-07
> 
> Who is currently asking for this to be a BCP?
> And why are we having that "argument"?
> 
> Adrian
> 
> 
> 





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