Joe: Yes, I did try to send you off-list the comments the "silent" comments. Next time I will send onlist. Thank you for resending the comments.
Sue -----Original Message----- From: i2rs [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Joe Marcus Clarke Sent: Friday, June 06, 2014 11:51 AM To: Alia Atlas; Dean Bogdanovic Cc: Jeffrey Haas; [email protected] Subject: Re: [i2rs] Working Group Last Call on architecture and problem statement drafts (redux) On 6/6/14, 10:10 AM, Alia Atlas wrote: > Dean, > > On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Dean Bogdanovic <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Jeff, > > Problem statement: suggested changes, several times, still waiting > for those to be addressed in the draft. As my comments are not > addressed, I don't think draft is ready for WGLC or RFC. > > > Just a reminder - I have the changes ready to go as discussed. We > were waiting on any other comments from the WGLC before updating the draft. > Given the paucity of such comments and the availability of integers, > I'll just submit it. I also had some comments on the last architecture draft. While some of them were silently addressed, there were a couple where I expected the authors to respond. I can resend the email if you missed it. It was a while ago. Joe > > Alia > > Architecture document: ready for WGLC, ready for RFC > > Dean > > On Jun 5, 2014, at 4:29 PM, Jeffrey Haas <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > Working Group, > > > > The original deadline for comments on WGLC for the problem > statement and > > architecture drafts of May 30 has passed with no comment whatsoever. > > > > While we all realize that there's a bit of exhaustion going on > with regard > > to these drafts, they are a bit of process we simply must get > done in order > > to fully move forward with our agenda of putting together data > models. > > > > We are *NOT* going to hold that work up further - it is clear > that there is > > consenus to start making that progress. > > > > To assist us with putting this work behind us, please respond to the > > following questions: > > > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-i2rs-problem-statement/ > > Have you read the problem statement draft? > > Do you think it is ready to be published as a RFC? > > (If no, please respond to the list with issues.) > > > > http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-i2rs-architecture/ > > Have you read the architecture draft? > > Do you think it is ready to be published as a RFC? > > (Ditto.) > > > > -- Jeff > > > > _______________________________________________ > > i2rs mailing list > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs > > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs > > > > > _______________________________________________ > i2rs mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs > _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs _______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
