I am disappointed at the lack of response to the question of acceptance of three drafts (ROA validation, repository structure, and bogons) from the Philly meeting as wg items. The questions went out to the list in April. Each draft got exactly one response.
In each case, the response was positive. But that's hardly enough to be judged "consensus". It might be judged "apathy", though. Please, people. Respond. Positively or negatively, we need to decide whether the working group should adopt each topic as part of our work. The messages you should respond to are: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sidr/current/msg00401.html (for draft-huston-sidr-bogons-01.txt - a new version has been announced since, so the correct link is http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-huston-sidr-bogons-01.txt) http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sidr/current/msg00402.html for draft-huston-sidr-repos-struct-01.txt http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sidr/current/msg00403.html for draft-huston-sidr-roa-validation-00.txt --Sandy _______________________________________________ Sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
