Tom, Snipped..
Urgency in getting started? Perhaps not. Desire to move slowly? Absolutely not. ;-) [[LY]] the latter is not the case absolutely in this WG. The WG want to adopt two drafts (or more?) without having a first WG meeting yet. The IETF moves pretty slow on the whole, and as it is, it will take us until the end of the year/early next year to get to the point of rechartering (according to the WG milestones). The call for adopting the document as a WG document isn't saying the document is finished or won't change. What it would say is that the framework document is the one that WG will use as basis for moving forward, as opposed to, say, developing a completely different document, or waiting for additional submissions and then picking from them or figuring out how to merge them into one. IMO, the framework doc is a good base to start with and I support the WG adopting it. If there are specific issues with the document that anyone thinks needs addressing, please raise them. It is perfectly OK to raise issues with the document and at the same time support making the document a WG document. [[LY]] I will post some comments in separated e-mail. Regards, Lucy Thomas _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3 _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
