I could agree, but I think the (plausible?) proposal to shut it down, stands alongside the proposals to seek to amend. I personally would prefer they were discussed at the same time, because otherwise you have led the world to believe there is a process to ameliorate and exclude the shut-it-down option.
Really, Its about the conversation. I don't feel like I stand in a caucus with very many members. -G On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 2:22 PM, Paul Wouters <[email protected]> wrote: > If this draft comes from an individual, then I think it is best left > dormant until all the groups and initiatives about resolving these 6761 > issues have progressed a bit further. > > Paul > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Feb 22, 2016, at 18:14, George Michaelson <[email protected]> wrote: > > I've just lodged > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-michaelson-dnsop-rfc6761-is-closed/ > > I am requesting a slot in the DNSOP WG session at ietf95 B.A. to discuss > this. > > cheers > > -George > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
