On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 4:45 PM, Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sigh.  I replied to an item in an mis-sorted grow mailbox without checking
> the date.  It looks like this was supported for WG adoption, but I still
> don't see a matching draft-grow?

we missed the draft 00 deadline, so Tony I think is sending (or has
sent?) one in anyway and it out to pop out the sausage manufacture
when the floodgates open.

> On Sun, Mar 11, 2012 at 04:37:15PM -0400, Jeffrey Haas wrote:
>> Tony,
>>
>> Note, I'm not speaking for the chairs or the ADs.
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 10:48:10AM +1000, Anthony Kirkham wrote:
>> > I'd appreciate any advice on how I might progress this draft. I'm
>> > reasonably happy with it now, but unsure how to take it the next
>> > step. I'd greatly appreciate any guidance.
>>
>> Two paths are:
>> - Keep it as an individual submission and find an AD to sponsor the
>>   appropriate IESG review, etc:
>>   http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/ad-sponsoring-docs.html
>> - Get the GROW chairs to do some of this work for you by requesting adoption
>>   of the draft as a GROW WG document.  Glancing at the *very stale* charter,
>>   it's in scope for the WG.  IMO, given the amount of comment the draft has
>>   received to date, perhaps it should even just go through WGLC.
>>
>> -- Jeff
>>
>> P.S. to the GROW chairs - it's probably time for a recharter.  And I thought
>> the BFD milestones were stale! :-)
>> _______________________________________________
>> GROW mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
> _______________________________________________
> GROW mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow

Reply via email to