just a small followup re timing.... I've said most of what I have to say on
this issue....
--On 11. desember 2004 10:59 -0500 John C Klensin
<john-ietf(_at_)jck(_dot_)com> wrote:
I think getting this into wider community review, i.e. due to
LC, is a good thing to do at this point, even while some of
us, myself included, continue to argue on particular points we
are uncomfortable with.
I think we generally agree. I'm not opposed to doing it this
way and can see some advantages; I just think it is important
that we be extremely clear about what we are doing and that the
final result really reflects community consensus. Seeing a
note from Harald that seemed to explain why were weren't quite
ready for a Last Call and then a Last Call announcement is, to
me, the sort of thing that calls for comment.
My thinking between the Wednesday note (which said "we can't send out the
Last Call today") and the Thursday Last Call was that we had a proposed
resolution of the issue that seemed to be accepted and was not (in my
judgment) a significant change to the document - so I figured it was "close
enough", and emitted the Last Call.
The previous schedule had the Last Call being emitted on Wednesday.
See Thursday's Last Call notice and my Saturday response to John in this
thread for the rest of my thinking.
Harald
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf