Without pointing at anyone in particular...Processwise a recall from the RFC editor could also be challenged all the way to the IAB or even the ISOC and lead us to 1000+ more emails up front and 10000 more before all the appeal processes have been exhausted. Is this the road we are taking?
Why do I get the feeling that one group on the list is trying to argue for changing the text because it has proven that it is more effort than we get value, another group is trying to push the document through the processes with the argument that "this has taken to long". In my mind it must be better for something to take a longer time if the result is clearer and better defined. There is always a break-off point but I don't feel we are there yet.
I fail to see what is so urgent with this.
- kurtis -
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
