> On Jun 19, 2019, at 10:57 AM, Eliot Lear <lear@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I think we might want to pause for a moment, just long enough to say this: > > Thank you very much, Heather. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This. Standards process stuff is sometimes a bit of a meat grinder that can eat people that are unprepared for it. A great thank-you to the contractors, staff, etc.. that make the day-to-day things happen that we all take for granted is a good way to start these conversations. This is also why virtual (and permanent record) participation is hard and so many people have f2f conversations at the IETF. That being said, I was once party to a contract that didn’t have a mutual termination clause. When this was discovered, it was problematic as it meant you couldn’t stop taking services even if you were unhappy or decided to end the product it was servicing. I don’t know the reason for the termination/transition, it could be for personal/family/health reasons or they’re relocating to Antarctica for the next 6 months. The reason I think isn’t relevant unless it was performance related and the way to address that would be via a pathway that doesn’t appear to be happening here. I’m grateful for all the staff/volunteers/wg chairs/corporations that support our efforts. Keep that in mind even as we each want to nitpick the 1’s and 0’s. - Jared
