Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-6man-rfc2460bis-08.txt> (Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification) to Internet Standard

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

 



Hi Brian, 

On Feb 10, 2017 8:32 PM, "Brian E Carpenter" <brian.e.carpenter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 11/02/2017 14:12, Ted Lemon wrote:
> On Feb 10, 2017, at 8:02 PM, Randy Bush <randy@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> excuse?  this is why we have ietf last call.
>
> No, we do not have IETF last call so that people who participated in the working group discussion can re-litigate the points they lost on in the working group discussion.

I was fairly specific when I raised the issue at
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/myyPO9b4dYfYeGQrdPjTNzIHArY

>> I do not dispute that this sentence reached WG consensus. However, I want
>> to ask if it has IETF consensus.

If people who were not involved in the 6man debate have opinions, it would
be useful to hear from them. I agree that there is no point in the same
people repeating the same arguments.

Thanks for putting it so succinctly. Getting the input from the broader community will be extremely helpful. 

Regards
Suresh


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