On 08/02/14 15:00, Yoav Nir wrote: > On Feb 8, 2014, at 7:41 AM, Trevor Perrin <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Fri, Feb 7, 2014 at 1:39 AM, Yoav Nir <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Thank you Chris, Chris and Ryan. >>> >>> This is to announce the beginning of a WGLC for this draft. Because a lot >>> of the group members are busy preparing for London and getting those drafts >>> out by the deadline, we will extend the time allocated for this WGLC to >>> three weeks, ending on February 28th. >>> >>> Please take this almost-final opportunity to review the draft and if you >>> spot a problem, send comments to the list. >> Hi Yoav, >> >> You've been trying to rush through a "Last Call" since June. A new >> draft appeared hours ago. There were substantive open questions the >> last time we discussed this, and there have been substantive changes >> in the draft. >> >> It's going to take time for people to read the new draft, digest the >> changes, and discuss. >> >> Could you please give us this time and stop trying to force this? > Hi Trevor. > > I don't think taking from June till now is "rushing". As you have said, there > are substantive changes in the draft, and that is why we have allowed three > weeks rather than traditional two for this last call. We (Tobias, myself and > the authors) believe that the issue that have been raised have been addressed > in this version. If it turns out that there are new issues, on which we > haven't yet reached consensus, we will discuss them, and have as many more > revisions as necessary. > > In low-traffic mailing lists such as this one, there are participants who > won't spend the time on reading and commenting until last call. In June we > had thought that all the issues were addressed, but new ones emerged only > when we started the WGLC. So we discussed more, and went through a few more > revisions, and here we are. As always in the IETF, nothing leaves the working > group without consensus being called. > > I believe that three weeks is plenty for reading, digesting and discussing. > > Regards, > > Yoav
Hi Trevor, I just wanted to add, that the call for WGLC has not been by decided by Yoav alone, but that as WG co-chairs we both discussed the appropriate timelines and are in full agreement on this. And as Paul pointed out by normal IETF standards a 3 week WGLC would normally be considered long. Best regards, Tobias Ps.: btw. if you think the draft still has major flaws or has not addressed adequately major flaws that have been pointed out earlier, I encourage you to post this now during the WGLC. _______________________________________________ websec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/websec
