I have given the document a careful reading, and I have no issues.
-Tom On Dec 7, 2010 2:08 PM, "Douglas E. Engert" <[email protected]> wrote: > We have a request to proceed with a call for consensus on: > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-brashear-afs3-pts-extended-names-07 > > Our draft procedures say a call should last at least 1 week, > and this being the first, I would like extend that to Thursday > December 16. > > Consensus as used by the IETF is not a vote but a general agreement > by the working group that the draft has addressed all issues. > If there is someone who strongly disagrees with some issue the group > should make ever effort to understand the issue even if the one making > the point is having trouble expressing the issue. > > Members should read the document and if you have issues please state > them and indicate what needs to be changed. If you have no issues, let > us know that too. > > Please respond using the subject from this e-mail. > > -- > > Douglas E. Engert <[email protected]> > Argonne National Laboratory > 9700 South Cass Avenue > Argonne, Illinois 60439 > (630) 252-5444 > > _______________________________________________ > AFS3-standardization mailing list > [email protected] > http://michigan-openafs-lists.central.org/mailman/listinfo/afs3-standardization
