Echoing Alissa's note: it is nice to have some additional and quite experienced eyes on these documents. It's not a sexy or fun thing to work on, for sure, but important nonetheless.
In any case, having specific feedback on what to improve or challenge, particularly when offered in such a succinct a way as you have below, is always appreciated and will make the eventual work product better in the end.
JL
On 10/22/18, 5:34 PM, "ietf on behalf of Scott Bradner" <ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx on behalf of sob@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
full explanations (in the documents) keeps people from having to make assumptions
I do not want to be driven to making assumptions which is why I’m asking for explanations in the documents
Scott
> On Oct 22, 2018, at 5:28 PM, Alissa Cooper <alissa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I wanted to remind everyone that the IASA2 WG has requested publication of a total of two documents so far. All of the rest of the documents are still under discussion in the working group and will be undergoing IETF last call only after the WG requests publication and I do AD reviews. I would encourage people to continue making constructive suggestions for how to improve the documents in the WG and avoid making assumptions about authors’ motivations. Thus far we’ve had a great constructive dialogue with lots of people chipping in to do this less-than-thrilling administrative work, which is very much appreciated.
>
> Regards,
> Alissa
