Re: Thought experiment [Re: Quality of Directorate reviews]

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

To: ietf@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Thought experiment [Re: Quality of Directorate reviews]
From: Keith Moore <moore@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2019 16:17:12 -0500
In-reply-to: <20191107193314.GE12148@localhost>
References: <20191107014849.GC12148@localhost> <563174A8-3961-476C-889D-A712EFD5DAEA@mnt.se> <20191107193314.GE12148@localhost>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0

On 11/7/19 2:33 PM, Nico Williams wrote:

Can we run an experiment where for some WG(s) we
don't require IESG review of their PS documents?


Why in the world would we want to do that?

Keith

References:
- Re: Thought experiment [Re: Quality of Directorate reviews]
  - From: Nico Williams
- Re: Thought experiment [Re: Quality of Directorate reviews]
  - From: Leif Johansson
- Re: Thought experiment [Re: Quality of Directorate reviews]
  - From: Nico Williams

Prev by Date: Re: Thought experiment [Re: Quality of Directorate reviews]
Next by Date: Re: Thought experiment [Re: Quality of Directorate reviews]
Previous by thread: Re: Thought experiment [Re: Quality of Directorate reviews]
Next by thread: Re: Thought experiment [Re: Quality of Directorate reviews]
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

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

Powered by Linux