On 6/9/14, 1:58 PM, Susan Hares wrote:
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.
Hmmm, sorry, then Susan. I don't think I saw your email. I have been
traveling a lot lately, so maybe it just slipped through the cracks.
Joe
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
