Re: [Enum] FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hollenbeck-epp-e164-00.txt

[Patrik Fältström <paf@cisco.com>]

--On 01-08-22 14.56 -0400 "A.M. Rutkowski" <amr@netmagic.com> wrote:

> By the
> IESG failing to close down this Working Group,
> it has effectively ceded it to policy discussions,
> unless someone wants to purse an ENUM Lite
> work effort.

The chairs of this wg have chose to have the mailing list and wg alive as
long as discussions go on in the ITU-T, i.e. even though RFC 2916 exists,
we have agreed to have the wg alive so IETF have a forum to discuss
eventual questions that might come from ITU-T. For example during the SG2
meeting in September.

This was last time discussed with our Area Directors and representatives
from ITU-T during the IETF in London.

It is not uncommon for IETF to have at least mailing lists, if even working
groups, stay for some time because of such liason issues.

Further, it is because one of the co-chairs can end up in discussions like
this we have two chairs of most wg's. So the other one can stop a
discussion the first got involved in.

I didn't sign the mail as co-chair, did I? (I do with this though)

But, yes, because of the list exists, policy talk come up on the list.

   paf, co-chair of the working group


_______________________________________________
enum mailing list
enum@ietf.org
http://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/enum