My suggestion - and always happy to be overruled - is close the call Friday the 14th which will be 10 days.
I feel it seems best to be patient. Also, does it make sense for the chairs to summarize the comments made during the call? We could do this (and by "we" I mean "me", if Laura would double check my work) tim On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 2:42 PM Tim Wicinski <tjw.i...@gmail.com> wrote: > When chairs trigger a state change, you can set "Expected weeks in state" > but it is usually left blank. > > Tim > Has pushed all the datatracker buttons > > On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 2:40 PM Murray S. Kucherawy <superu...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 11:24 AM Scott Kitterman <ietf-d...@kitterman.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On Monday, April 10, 2023 2:05:28 PM EDT Laura Atkins wrote: >>> ... >>> > There is currently an active Call for Adoption for a draft. >>> ... >>> >>> What's the plan for closing this out? I haven't seen any objections to >>> the >>> idea and as of tomorrow it will have been over a week since the formal >>> call >>> for adoption. This happens rarely enough in my experience that I don't >>> recall >>> how long these normally run. >>> >> >> Usually a week or two. The original post wasn't specific, so at this >> point I think the chairs could call consensus at their discretion unless >> someone wants to argue it should stay open longer. >> >> The datatracker normally asks what the CFA duration is, but in the >> "History" tab for this document it doesn't look like one was recorded. >> Might be something for the tools team to look at. >> >> -MSK >> _______________________________________________ >> Ietf-dkim mailing list >> Ietf-dkim@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim >> >
_______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list Ietf-dkim@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-dkim
