On 17/09/2014 09:46, Dave Crocker wrote:
On 9/16/2014 2:31 PM, Joel M. Halpern wrote:
And from experiences we all have been through, I would stronglye xpect
even more complex and difficult discussions if we open the document up
to substantive changes.
Taken on its face, this appears to be an argument for never making any
changes to any aspect of IETF infrastructure.
Which I'm pretty sure is not what Joel meant.
I'd rather see a rapid IETF Last Call on draft-kucherawy-rfc3777bis-01,
which is intentionally a no-op in terms of process changes. It could
easily be expedited as an RFC before the next IETF, if anybody cares
that much. Then we can have a managed discussion of the issues and
proposals that Mike has raised, which deserve debate.
Brian