the BOF that came up with the inclusion of AD & WG chairs in the list did not discuss that question Scott > On Feb 18, 2018, at 7:29 PM, Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Scott, > > > --On Saturday, February 17, 2018 06:22 -0500 "Scott O. Bradner" > > <sob at sobco.com> wrote: > > > >> see RFC 8179 (BCP 79) section 1.m > >> > >> m. "Participating in an IETF discussion or activity": making a > >> Contribution, as described above, or in any other way > >> acting in order to influence the outcome of a discussion > >> relating to the IETF Standards Process. Without > >> limiting the generality of the foregoing, acting as a > >> Working Group Chair or Area Director constitutes > >> "Participating" in all activities of the relevant > >> working group(s) he or she is responsible for in an area. > >> "Participant" and "IETF Participant" mean any individual > >> Participating in an IETF discussion or activity. > > from that procedure statements above. Should we expect that we get a reply from an AD when sending comment on a WG draft within the IETF LC? I think at least one AD is responsible to participate/discuss with communities LC comments on this list, some don't think so in IETF. > > Should we leave final-discussions only to authors/WG which adopted the draft? IMO no, but must include one AD discussing those community comments. > > AB
