Alvaro, Thanks again — Closing the loop, please see inline.
> On Sep 27, 2015, at 7:16 PM, Alvaro Retana (aretana) <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On 9/27/15, 4:54 PM, "Carlos Pignataro (cpignata)" <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > Carlos: > > Hi! >> I will keep this document in AD Evaluation (and not return it to the WG) at >> least until a decision has been made. > > Sounds good — please let us know what’s next about this to reach that > decision. > > That is a WG decision, so I expect the Chairs to let me know when they think > consensus has been reached. > I would assume that, since both documents were adopted simultaneously, WG consensus was that two documents (and not a merged one) is what made sense. We can see if there is any WG indication otherwise. Jeff? > Note that I don’t expect a formal consensus call or a new WGLC (based on a > potential merge) — unless the Chairs think it is needed. Given that the > documents already have WG consensus, I would expect my suggestion to be > resolved quickly. > > BTW, I read your justification for not merging in the thread about > draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-base. Thanks for that! Thank you for reading it! — Carlos. > > Alvaro.
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
