On Sep 21, 2012, at 8:32 PM, Randy Bush wrote: > i note that you got one actual reivew, which is good. the only other > stuff i have seen is people telling the chairs what the process should > be, embarrassing.
I concur - the stated fact that we're still awaiting revisions to the threats document and the requirements draft has long-standing unaddressed comments and the protocol document is being WG last called -- it is indeed embarrassing. Given the potential array of implications of work here, as well as the climate surrounding Internet governance and the global stability of the routing system, open standards development and transparency, we ought to have the good sense to follow our own processes. If solutions champions want less friction take it to the IRTF and make it EXPERIMENTAL... Feeling a bit like "the wall" here [1].... -danny [1] http://archive.psg.com/051000.ccr-ivtf.html _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
