Comments on draft-roach-bis-documents-00

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

To: Adam Roach <adam@xxxxxxxxxxx>, ietf@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Comments on draft-roach-bis-documents-00
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 09 May 2019 01:34:23 -0700

Hi Adam,

There is the following sentence in Section 3.2 of draft-roach-bis-documents-00:

   "IESG members SHOULD NOT issue DISCUSS or ABSTAIN ballot positions
    based on unchanged text except as described in Section 3.3."

Why is an ABSTAIN an issue?

What about IESG member "comments"?  Can those comments be ignored?

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Comments on draft-roach-bis-documents-00
  - From: Stephen Farrell
- Re: Comments on draft-roach-bis-documents-00
  - From: S Moonesamy
- Re: Comments on draft-roach-bis-documents-00
  - From: Magnus Westerlund

Prev by Date: Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- considered harmful
Next by Date: Re: [arch-d] deprecating Postel's principle- considered harmful
Previous by thread: Opsdir telechat review of draft-ietf-mmusic-rfc4566bis-35
Next by thread: Re: Comments on draft-roach-bis-documents-00
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

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

Powered by Linux