Hi Rich! > -----Original Message----- > From: Salz, Rich <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 5:25 PM > To: Roman Danyliw <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Trans] Summary of DISCUSS items for draft-ietf-trans-rfc6962-bis > > > > We can't publish it without clearing the final two discusses. > > Then tell the two IESG folks to just clear their discuss and let this "we're > trying > to die" group publish their EXPERIMENTAL document.
[snip] Yes, this document has been under review for quite some time. Nevertheless, the above proposed strategy isn't the resolution process. The feedback provided by the respective ADs in their discuss ballots needs a response (to Ben; and previously Alexey and now Murray) if the document is to progress. There were 5 discusses on the document originally. In my review of the history, where iteration occurred/text edits were made, the discusses positions were cleared (3 of those 5; Alissa, Mirja, Adam). If edits in -32, -33, -34 address an open discussion position, it would be helpful to point that out. I didn't see that in my review. Likewise, if there is a need to "discuss the discuss", by all means, let's have that conversation. FWIW, I added the needed YES ballot after the previous AD's YES timed out to let this document proceed, but I support the current open discusses. Regards, Roman _______________________________________________ Trans mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/trans
