Quoting the log:
22:34 <grumpy> motion: accept my resignation as Chair
[...]
22:35 <Julian> So ordered.
Much better, I've fixed my "old Council" page (not yet uploaded
to my main site, I'll do that later).
22:39 <grumpy> doing the minutes is a lot of work
Yes, Julian has the most confusing^Winteresting Council meeting
still on the to-do side. The freshly approved new were fine
(I'm not sure about mentioning your father, better check this).
22:41 <Julian> Ok, I move that Mark be the chair for the
remaining weeks.
[...]
22:42 <Julian> Great, we have a new chair. Thanks, Mark.
Dito. Actually that's internal Council business I don't care
about, IIRC the original idea was "create an official title for
Meng, and for stuff like PRs", otherwise the next Council could
also rotate jobs, or work as a team without a designated Chair.
22:45 <Julian> I have contacted the three yesterday but
haven't heard of them (except for Frank).
[...]
22:45 <grumpy> of course, being a weekend, that isn't
surprising
Indeed, the RO issue was never near to becoming a showstopper.
22:46 <MarkK> (if the latter is the case, then please
disregard my earlier comment, Frank)
No, it was correct. And it's IMO okay if the Council uses IRC
for its meetings, only for Meng it often didn't work. I don't
like it, any "chat" is too addictive for me.
22:52 <Julian> Anyway, Greg, would you be willing to act
as the EO/RO?
[...]
22:53 <Julian> Ok, so ordered.
Great, all procedural issues solved, modulo two (?) "minutes".
23:10 <MarkK> Wayne, I presume any futire council can count
on your help with the IESG/IETF with
finalizing the RFC, right?
23:11 <MarkK> (well, that is actually no longer any of my
business; I'm sure you'll be asked, though)
First thing I did in my reply on spf-discuss...
[...]
23:12 <grumpy> off course...
23:12 <grumpy> s/off/of/
...good to have that also clear. For the next Council I hope
that they decide about "to IAB or not to IAB" a.s.a.p., Brian
published the IESG decision December 12 IIRC. The RfC editor
queue is a bit whacky since they test XML, but Bill's tools
usually reflect the correct picture:
http://rtg.ietf.org/~fenner/ietf/rfc/hist.cgi?draft=draft-schlitt-spf-classic
The RfC-editor did not yet see that the "IESG" flag should go,
and that SPF in fact depends on the publication of 2476bis:
http://rtg.ietf.org/~fenner/ietf/rfc/hist.cgi?draft=draft-gellens-submit-bis
Bye, Frank
-------
Sender Policy Framework: http://www.openspf.org/
Archives at http://archives.listbox.com/spf-discuss/current/
To unsubscribe, change your address, or temporarily deactivate your
subscription,
please go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=spf-discuss(_at_)v2(_dot_)listbox(_dot_)com