With one day left in CFA for draft-tldm-simple-homenet-naming, here is my summary of what I think I've read.
Exactly 3 people have expressed support for adoption (Daniel [author], Michael R, James). Hmm. That's not a lot. Juliusz expressed opposition to adoption, but Ray and Michael said the reasoning for objection was flawed (that Juliusz was setting the bar too high and the procedural objections were not valid in the context of IETF procedures). Ray said the purpose of a CFA is "to get agreement that a document is an appropriate direction for the WG to explore, even if it might require substantial work". Ted [author] said he thought it might be reasonable to put the CFA on hold until Daniel did another update. Tim C said he thought it was early for adoption (for this and related dnssd drafts). I hope I got this summary right. Did I miss anything important? Does anyone else have an opinion? Does anyone who has expressed an opinion want to express a new and different opinion? Barbara _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list homenet@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
