On Feb 24, 2008, at 12:57 PM, Joel Jaeggli wrote: > Chris Malayter wrote:
>> Would you ask the PC to release the minutes from the SJC nanog and >> any >> meeting since. > > Given that the pc last met on tuesday at lunch, I think the minutes > when > released will prove to be a poor source the sort information you're > looking for. Let's stop dancing around the issue. There was discussion regarding the Peering BoF amongst the SC & PC. There is no reason to hide this fact - just the opposite. And there were at least some provisional outcomes from those discussions. I am unclear on why those decisions are not being announced to the community. The question is where we stand in the process. If the PC does not have an official stance, then we should all stop speculating until there is an official stance or (hopefully) an official request for input from the community. If the PC has an official stance, then the community needs to hear it ASAP. Either way, gossiping on a mailing list is not the right way. We had a revolution, let's follow our own rules. As Randy like to proclaim every 14 ms, let's have some transparency. What was said, why was it said, and what decisions were made? SC / PC members, please step up, so we can all go back to arguing over leaking deaggs. :) -- TTFN, patrick _______________________________________________ Nanog-futures mailing list Nanog-futures@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog-futures
