Pete - > >This debate between John and Pete seems to be at such an abstract > >meta level to me, that I have difficulty to try and see what it > >means for the IAS BCP doc that I thinkwe are trying to get consensus > >on. > > > >As I said, it could be just me, but I seem unable to map it to any > >issue(s) with the curremt text in rev 02 of the doc. > > Ignoring John's caricature of my position: I think I am suggesting an > addition to the current BCP which more or less says: > > "This BCP will take effect upon adoption of the BCP by the IESG and > the concurrent <<insert thing that ISOC does which codifies in some > interesting way the adoption of the relationship by ISOC>>"
This sounds pretty concrete ... any agreement has to be ratified by both parties and the current draft doesn't say how that will happen by ISOC. > > I also suggested to insert for the part in <<>>: > > "adoption of an ISOC by-law signifying the adoption of the principles > laid out in this BCP." > I'm fine with your <<>> or any other <<>>=="yes". Regards,, Carl _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
