On 10/12/12 10:53 AM, "Christopher Morrow" <morrowc.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>I think if, in the end, the wg decides to abandon the work that's also >fine, but we should have a more structured chat about the topic, that >happens around a draft. As the person who specifically asked of the chairs that the draft authors be allowed to address the issues raised, I'd like specifics on this more structured chat. I ask because it is not apparent that the normal means of IETF discussion were attempted. Of the 38 messages regarding the draft directly, the draft author only responded 3 times, nor did the author engage in any of the side discussions. And the draft submitted as a working group document addresses NONE of the issues raised (it is just a re-spin with the dates and file name changed). If normal IETF discourse is being set aside especially when it was not fully engaged, we should also be given the exception criteria under which this scenario qualifies when others do not. -andy _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list sidr@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
