On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 4:40 AM, Paul Wouters <p...@nohats.ca> wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Apr 2018, Benjamin Kaduk wrote: > > I don't really agree with that characterization. To state my >> understanding, >> as responsible AD, of the status of this document: this document is in the >> RFC Editor's queue being processed. >> > > That was a process mistake. > > 1) ekr filed a DISCUSS > 2) other people raised issues in response > 3) ekr's DISCUSS was resolved but not the other people's concern > 4) document was placed in RFC Editor queue despite this > 5) TLS consensus call done on the list > 6) here we are.... > > I think it is not good to use this process as a way of approving things. > A process mistake was made. > The question Ben was asking, though, is whether the impact of that process mistake is serious enough to merit pulling back the doc from the RFC editor. Personally, I think the answer is no, and I'm not hearing clear consensus in either direction in this thread. So ISTM the best information the chairs and ADs have to go on is the hum taken in the room (which all of the litigants here participated in), which was pretty clearly in favor of proceeding. --Richard > > Paul > > > _______________________________________________ > TLS mailing list > TLS@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls >
_______________________________________________ TLS mailing list TLS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls
