Kurt Seth had sent out a detailed email about our plan for working through three tickets a week. Now it was from May but the process is spelled out:
https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dmarc/B6M4VSD7tDkPT6KCYul7uRGtI-Q/ Seth has been picking the three tickets over the weekend, which could be improved. We also have been finalizing the editors and getting everything put in place. It is our intention that the editors will push the three tickets a week. As for having a call for consensus, I would not have an issue with that, though we should decide how long that consensus call will take. tim On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 2:18 PM Dotzero <[email protected]> wrote: > +1 > > I'd also like to see calls for consensus rather than a declaration of > consensus by the chairs based on posts from a very small minority of the > members of the list. > > Michael Hammer. > > On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 2:01 PM Kurt Andersen (IETF) < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> It seems like the chairs have been relatively _laissez faire_ to an >> extreme degree in this group. As a result the group seems to be a bit >> adrift and not reaching any particular conclusions. >> >> I'd like to call on the chairs to consider bringing a bit more focus to >> the discussions so that they could achieve closure more quickly. Ideally we >> could come to these changes without having to wait for IETF109. >> >> --Kurt Andersen >> _______________________________________________ >> dmarc mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc >> > _______________________________________________ > dmarc mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc >
_______________________________________________ dmarc mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmarc
