[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Ecrit] PhoneBCP
That question has not been put to the list yet, but it has to be before it goes to publication request.
I believe the statement helps the reading community understand the context in which the document is used, versus other solutions. It is therefore helpful to our end customers.
I agree the wording could probably be better, but it was drafted in a spirit of trying to find some middle ground. You don't seem to be prepared to enter the middle ground.
Well two of us can adopt intransient positions. In my view you haven't justified yours. I therefore don't need to justify mine further.
Keith
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Winterbottom, James [mailto:James.Winterbottom at andrew.com]
> Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 2:10 AM
> To: DRAGE, Keith (Keith); Brian Rosen; Richard Barnes; Ted Hardie
> Cc: ECRIT
> Subject: RE: [Ecrit] PhoneBCP
>
> Hi Keith,
>
> So you are saying that you will object to the document
> leaving the WG unless the statement is included, on the
> grounds that there have been discussions about what the
> statement should say? This is despite the fact that no
> consensus was ever reached to include the statement in the
> first place.
>
> I believe that other than this debate these documents are
> good to go, and that once this hum is completed the consensus
> will be reached and the documents can leave the WG.
>
> Cheers
> James
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: DRAGE, Keith (Keith) [mailto:drage at alcatel-lucent.com]
> Sent: Monday, 27 April 2009 6:08 PM
> To: Winterbottom, James; Brian Rosen; Richard Barnes; Ted Hardie
> Cc: ECRIT
> Subject: RE: [Ecrit] PhoneBCP
>
> I hum for the applicability statement.
>
> I would also note that if we go the way you want to go, we
> have a hum for whether the document is acceptable without
> this. Having had the discussion to agree an applicability
> statement, I warn that I will hum against a document without it.
>
> You need some form of consensus to get the document out of the WG.
>
> regards
>
> Keith
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ecrit-bounces at ietf.org
> [mailto:ecrit-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf
> > Of Winterbottom, James
> > Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 10:58 PM
> > To: Brian Rosen; Richard Barnes; Ted Hardie
> > Cc: ECRIT
> > Subject: Re: [Ecrit] PhoneBCP
> >
> > My point is that because there was no consensus at the
> IETF, in fact
> > the document should have remained unchanged.
> >
> > I want a hum first as to whether the applicability statement is
> > required at all. As I have stated more then one I don't
> believe it is,
> > and no reasonable argument has yet been provided to changed my mind.
> >
> > So let us first establish with a clear consensus that the
> > applicability statement is required.
> >
> > I HUM against the inclusion of an applicability statement.
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Brian Rosen [mailto:br at brianrosen.net]
> > Sent: Sat 4/25/2009 1:04 PM
> > To: Winterbottom, James; 'Richard Barnes'; 'Ted Hardie'
> > Cc: 'ECRIT'
> > Subject: RE: [Ecrit] PhoneBCP
> >
> > Actually, I think the list hum is whether or not you accept the
> > change, as proposed, and consider the document ready to send to the
> > IESG. It's kind of a combination of is an applicability statement
> > acceptable, and is this particular one acceptable (and are you
> > otherwise okay with the document, which is implied in
> Marc's message,
> > but I think important to recognize).
> >
> > Brian
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ecrit-bounces at ietf.org
> [mailto:ecrit-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf
> > Of Winterbottom, James
> > Sent: Saturday, April 25, 2009 4:51 AM
> > To: Richard Barnes; Ted Hardie
> > Cc: ECRIT
> > Subject: Re: [Ecrit] PhoneBCP
> >
> > So is this turning into a list "hum" as to whether we
> should have an
> > applicability statement or not?
> >
> > ISTM that this would be an appropriate course of action
> given the lack
> > on consensus at the actually meeting.
> >
> >
> > Cheers
> > James
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ecrit-bounces at ietf.org on behalf of Richard Barnes
> > Sent: Fri 4/24/2009 9:32 PM
> > To: Ted Hardie
> > Cc: ECRIT
> > Subject: Re: [Ecrit] PhoneBCP
> >
> > +1
> >
> >
> > Ted Hardie wrote:
> > > At 11:23 AM -0700 4/24/09, Marc Linsner wrote:
> > >>
> > <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ecrit-phonebcp
> > -09.txt>http:/
> > /www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ecrit-phonebcp-09.txt
> > >>
> > >> At the San Francisco meeting and ensuing list threads, the
> > last issue
> > around PhoneBCP was whether or not to include an 'applicability
> > statement'.
> > The hum during the meeting was inconclusive. The draft editor has
> > included text in this latest version in an attempt to compromise on
> > this issue.
> > >>
> > >> Please review this version and respond by Friday May 1 to
> > the list as
> > >> to
> > your acceptance of this change.
> > >>
> > >> Thanks,
> > >>
> > >> Marc, Hannes, & Roger
> > >
> > > I support the current draft going forward to publication
> requested.
> > >
> > > regards,
> > > Ted
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >> Content-Type: text/plain; name="ATT00001.txt"
> > >> Content-Description: ATT00001.txt
> > >> Content-Disposition: attachment;
> filename="ATT00001.txt"; size=194;
> > >> creation-date="Fri, 24 Apr 2009 11:24:11 GMT";
> > >> modification-date="Fri, 24 Apr 2009 11:24:11 GMT"
> > >>
> > >> Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:ATT00001 5171.txt (TEXT/ttxt)
> > (003FF52C)
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Ecrit mailing list
> > > Ecrit at ietf.org
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ecrit mailing list
> > Ecrit at ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > --------------
> > --------------------
> > This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain
> > privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.
> > If you have received it in error, please notify the sender
> immediately
> > and delete the original. Any unauthorized use of this email is
> > prohibited.
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > --------------
> > --------------------
> > [mf2]
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ecrit mailing list
> > Ecrit at ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit
> >
> >
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----------------------------------
> > This message is for the designated recipient only and may contain
> > privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.
> > If you have received it in error, please notify the sender
> immediately
> > and delete the original. Any unauthorized use of this email is
> > prohibited.
> > --------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----------------------------------
> > [mf2]
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ecrit mailing list
> > Ecrit at ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ecrit
> >
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------
> This message is for the designated recipient only and may
> contain privileged, proprietary, or otherwise private information.
> If you have received it in error, please notify the sender
> immediately and delete the original. Any unauthorized use of
> this email is prohibited.
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------------------------
> [mf2]
>
>