On 14/06/2014 02:29, Ted Lemon wrote: > On Jun 13, 2014, at 10:20 AM, Mark Townsley <[email protected]> wrote: >> Ted, you asked Ray and I to issue a WGLC on a very specific set of text. You >> are falling into your own trap of going beyond that. > > No, Mark, I agreed with Ray that the proposed text needed a last call. Last > calls are not for rubber stamps. They often produce proposed changes. > This is what I wanted, and why I asked for the last call. I don't think the > text is right as is.
There seems to be general agreement that the stuff about metrics is over-specification. The rest of the text has already got the OK from the ISEG. So why are we still discussing it? Just delete that paragraph. The worst that happens is that the document advances with one IESG abstention against it. It's prototype implementations and early deployments that will tell us the right answer, not further debate. Brian _______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
