On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 2:49 PM Shumon Huque <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 2:41 PM Peter van Dijk < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> This is not a comment on the specific draft at all. This is a comment >> on WG process. It seems weird to me to discuss prioritisation -after- >> we spend time talking about current and, especially, new business. >> >> > I'm sure the chairs will answer you on process, but I wanted to state that > I > had actually posted -00 before the draft cutoff (-01 posted later was a > minor > tweak) and asked for agenda time then. The chairs apologized to me later > that they hadn't responded earlier and said they could fit me on Thursday. > Quick followup - I'm happy to go at the end. I'm not even sure I was going to ask for adoption - this was more information sharing, and asking the WG what I should do with this draft. So it need not impact the current work prioritization discussion. (I am assuming the WG will not bless the BL method, so it is unlikely to adopt it or a derivative, but I may be surprised). Shumon.
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
