Thanks Gerv. I'll make the revision. Actually, when I said "two", my unit of measure was the "month", not the "IETF cycle". I think there was consensus for, at least, one cycle. Let's push for results in four months, and then see how we did. All the best. Tim.
-----Original Message----- From: Gervase Markham [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2014 3:39 PM To: Tim Moses; [email protected] Subject: Re: [wpkops] London meeting minutes On 13/03/14 19:18, Tim Moses wrote: > Colleagues – See the minutes here … > > http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/89/wpkops.html "Gerv mentioned that Microsoft hosts a test site." Actually, I mentioned that I had heard that Microsoft had a test _suite_ - and it was in a different context, not in the context of responses to the survey. "Gerv suggested that we allow the survey approach one more “IETF cycle” of four months." ...and then Tim suggested two, which seemed to be more the consensus view, although this is not recorded. Gerv _______________________________________________ wpkops mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/wpkops
