Alper Yegin <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> scribbled on Thursday, August 24, 2006 12:42 AM:
> I don't see a good reason why we should deviate from the process. Hmm. I thought that the process was for documents to pass IETF Last Call (which these have not, in anything like their current form) before IESG review. If the changes made to the documents had been minor editorial/technical changes, then it would be appropriate to continue directly to IESG review; my understanding is that that is not the case. > > Alper > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Glen Zorn (gwz) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 2:12 AM >> To: Alper Yegin; Mark Townsley (townsley) >> Cc: Jari Arkko; [email protected] >> Subject: RE: [Pana] Revised I-Ds to IESG >> >> >> Hi Mark, >> >> PANA WG has completed revising the two WG documents based on the IETF >> last call feedback. Could you please take them to IESG review now? >> >>> Wouldn't a more appropriate next step be another IETF Last Call? _______________________________________________ Pana mailing list [email protected] https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pana
