--On onsdag, oktober 06, 2004 17:50:04 -0400 John C Klensin
<john-ietf(_at_)jck(_dot_)com> wrote:
--On Wednesday, October 06, 2004 1:07 PM +0200 Harald Tveit Alvestrand
<harald(_at_)alvestrand(_dot_)no> wrote:
I do think our thoughts run very much in parallel - I'll be
interested to hear more of why you think the "scenario O"
organizational format will make it hard to make those support
functions work.
Again a misunderstanding -- I don't see "Scenario O" as being either
better or worse in regard to the above than any other scenario. My
concern is with the definition of the Clerk function, which is
scenario-independent.
Thanks for the clarification!
I thought you might be pointing at the "one staff member - rest of the work
is contracts", which is a common feature to scenarios C and O. If "all"
that is required is to modify the description of the "clerk" function, that
needs to be done before we call for interested parties - it is not on the
critical path to adopting one scenario for implementation (although all
clarification early is good).
Harald
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf