From: Michael Richardson Sent: Sunday, November 13, 2022 09:11 To: tom petch; [email protected] Subject: Re: [OPSAWG] progressing the PCAP documents
>>>>> OPSAWG <[email protected]> on behalf of Michael Richardson >>>>> <[email protected]> writes: > That is not what I see in the Datatracker. Not important :-) The previous adoption call was botched, and I stated what I expect the desired states to be. Do you object to the plan? <tp> Yes! I see an e-mail from you in June 2021 proposing adoption of draft-gharris as Informational and I see such an adopted I-D in the Datatracker . You seem to be saying that you botched it. If you want to change what is in the Datatracker, and I do not know what changes you have in mind apart, perhaps. from a change in status, then that is something for the WG Chairs and AD to fix, with the consensus of the WG. I do not see your recent e-mail as being a consensus, I also see what I see in the Datatracker as important in the work of the IETF. Tom Petch -- Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
_______________________________________________ OPSAWG mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/opsawg
