Re: [Ianaplan] Last Call: <draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response-06.txt> (Dra

Richard,

> On 27 November, I requested that the co-chairs provide a justification for
> the conclusion that rough consensus has been achieved, see:
>
>  http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ianaplan/current/msg01402.html
>
> The requested justification has not yet been provided.
Calling the consensus is a judgment call. For what it is worth, I have been 
quite satisfied with the chairs and the document shepherd reading the 
opinions of the group. Their thoughts have been discussed in the thread
“draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response moving to next step”, see the thread
beginning at 

  http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ianaplan/current/msg01401.html

See in particular this e-mail:

  http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ianaplan/current/msg01406.html

as well as the shepherd writeup:

  
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response/shepherdwriteup/

Also, for information, the IESG has not yet considered this draft. But they 
will. Right now it's in IETF last call, the outcome of which will first be 
evaluated by the responsible AD, in this case me. And then by the IESG 
as a whole. At that point the IESG will determine if there have been any 
process or other issues that need consideration or action.

Jari

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail