On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 6:54 PM, Scott O. Bradner <s...@sobco.com> wrote: > which is too bad since I think the topic is a useful one
Yup, as do I... If there is a sudden upwelling of support and interest, we can definitely discuss rerunning the WGLC. > > but, as chairs, we are supposed to do things based on WG consensus > and if no one speaks up we have no way to know if there is consensus > one way or another Yup. The consensus on some of the documents we have progressed has been thiner that we'd like. We've been getting consensus, but from a much smaller group than ideal. Remember folk - if you might want the working group to review one of *your* documents in the future, you are going to have to review (and provide feedback!) on other peoples documents now... W > > Scott > >> On Jan 28, 2015, at 6:40 PM, Warren Kumari <war...@kumari.net> wrote: >> >> On Fri, Jan 9, 2015 at 12:15 PM, Warren Kumari <war...@kumari.net> wrote: >>> Dear OpsAWG WG, >>> >>> The authors of draft-ietf-opsawg-vmm-mib have indicated that they >>> believe that the document is ready, and have asked for Working Group >>> Last Call. >>> >>> The draft is available here: >>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-opsawg-vmm-mib/ >>> >>> Please review this draft to see if you think it is ready for >>> publication and send comments to the list, clearly stating your view. >>> >>> This WGLC ends Fri 23-Jan-2015. >>> >>> In addition, to satisfy RFC 6702 ("Promoting Compliance with >>> Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)"): >>> Are you personally aware of any IPR that applies to >>> draft-ietf-opsawg-vmm-mib? If so, has this IPR been disclosed in >>> compliance with IETF IPR rules? (See RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669, and 5378 >>> for more details.) >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Warren Kumari >>> (as OpsAWG WG co-chair) >> >> The WGLC has concluded with no feedback or comments, and so we have to >> conclude that the WG is no longer interested in this work. >> >> Apologies to the authors, >> W >> >>> >>> -- >>> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad >>> idea in the first place. >>> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing >>> regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair >>> of pants. >>> ---maf >> >> >> >> -- >> I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad >> idea in the first place. >> This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing >> regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair >> of pants. >> ---maf >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OPSAWG mailing list >> OPSAWG@ietf.org >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg > -- I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad idea in the first place. This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair of pants. ---maf _______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list OPSAWG@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
