Re: [netmod] moving forward with schema mount

On 01/23/2018 03:26 PM, Juergen Schoenwaelder wrote: > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 08:05:54PM +, Kent Watsen wrote: >> >> Thank you all for the important discussion since the completion of WGLC on >> Nov 6th. >> >> Per normal process, drafts typically progress once LC comments are address >>

Re: [netmod] moving forward with schema mount

One additional point below. n 01/24/2018 09:35 AM, joel jaeggli wrote: > > > On 1/24/18 8:07 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Kent Watsen writes: >> >>> Thank you all for the important discussion since the completion of WGLC on >>> Nov 6th. >>> >>> Per normal

Re: [netmod] moving forward with schema mount

On Wed, 2018-01-24 at 09:35 -0500, joel jaeggli wrote: > > On 1/24/18 8:07 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Kent Watsen writes: > > > > > Thank you all for the important discussion since the completion of WGLC on > > > Nov 6th. > > > > > > Per normal process,

Re: [netmod] moving forward with schema mount

On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 09:35:49AM -0500, joel jaeggli wrote: > > Once the document is adopted by the working group it's the working > group's document. > > The consensus call was made back here: > > https://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/netmod/current/msg19433.html So then go ahead and

Re: [netmod] moving forward with schema mount

On 1/24/18 8:07 AM, Ladislav Lhotka wrote: > Hi, > > Kent Watsen writes: > >> Thank you all for the important discussion since the completion of WGLC on >> Nov 6th. >> >> Per normal process, drafts typically progress once LC comments are >> address unless significant

Re: [netmod] moving forward with schema mount

Hi, Kent Watsen writes: > Thank you all for the important discussion since the completion of WGLC on > Nov 6th. > > Per normal process, drafts typically progress once LC comments are > address unless significant faults are found. Post LC comments have > been made, which

Re: [netmod] moving forward with schema mount

Great news. Thanks, Chris. Kent Watsen writes: Thank you all for the important discussion since the completion of WGLC on Nov 6th. Per normal process, drafts typically progress once LC comments are address unless significant faults are found. Post LC comments have

Re: [netmod] moving forward with schema mount

Juergen Schoenwaelder writes: > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 08:05:54PM +, Kent Watsen wrote: >> >> Thank you all for the important discussion since the completion of WGLC on >> Nov 6th. >> >> Per normal process, drafts typically progress once LC comments

Re: [netmod] moving forward with schema mount

On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 04:52:50PM +, Kent Watsen wrote: > > Not currently, as there are two vocal groups with opposing > viewpoints. However, there was strong for advancing it > before. The chairs had to make a decision and, as you can > imagine, it wasn't easy. Ultimately, to use a

Re: [netmod] moving forward with schema mount

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 08:05:54PM +, Kent Watsen wrote: > > Thank you all for the important discussion since the completion of WGLC on > Nov 6th. > > Per normal process, drafts typically progress once LC comments are address > unless significant faults are found. Post LC comments have

Re: [netmod] moving forward with schema mount

> So do you believe that this decision reflects rough consensus > in the WG? Not currently, as there are two vocal groups with opposing viewpoints. However, there was strong for advancing it before. The chairs had to make a decision and, as you can imagine, it wasn't easy. Ultimately, to

Re: [netmod] moving forward with schema mount

On 1/23/18 3:24 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote: > Hi, > > So do you believe that this decision reflects rough consensus in the > WG? > > I hope that the document writeup will show that the WG is divided on > this issue. > > For the record, if this means that using Schema Mount *with* NMDA gets >

Re: [netmod] moving forward with schema mount

Hi, So do you believe that this decision reflects rough consensus in the WG? I hope that the document writeup will show that the WG is divided on this issue. For the record, if this means that using Schema Mount *with* NMDA gets delayed, I strongly object to this decision. Assuming this

[netmod] moving forward with schema mount

Thank you all for the important discussion since the completion of WGLC on Nov 6th. Per normal process, drafts typically progress once LC comments are address unless significant faults are found. Post LC comments have been made, which needed consideration, notably the relationship with NMDA