On 11/8/12 9:57 AM, "Murphy, Sandra" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>Calls for adoption are not (supposed) to discuss content. Thanks for that clarification. The IETF is a deliberative body, and I was under the impression that discussion at any point in the process, though not optimal, was acceptable. I did not realize SIDR had deviated. >Are you sure you are not thinking of wglc, where consensus on the content >is needed? I'm pretty sure I understand the difference between WGLC and wg document acceptance. What I am uncertain about is the criteria for working group document acceptance in SIDR. >And I said it generated "a first storm of discussion", not "interest". So, is "a fire storm of discussion" the threshold for document acceptance? If a document fails to generate such a storm, will it not be accepted? Since ROVER did generate a storm, will you be accepting it as a working group document? Again, I'm trying to determine the criteria upon which the chairs accept a document as a working group item. I do find "a fire storm of discussion" to be a unique threshold. I'll note that you did say, "Nothing like actively working on a topic to demonstrate interest in working on the topic." Hence my confusion. -andy _______________________________________________ sidr mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
