RE: Issue: #751: Section 7 - Removability, using term "BCP"

To: sob at harvard.edu, ietf at ietf.org, sbrim at cisco.com
Subject: RE: Issue: #751: Section 7 - Removability, using term "BCP"
From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen at lucent.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 2004 14:04:20 +0100
List-help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: ietf-bounces at ietf.org

> 
> the other (or at least another) Scott suggested:
>   ... shall be structured to enable a clean transition in the event that
>   the IETF community decides that such a transition is required and
>   documents its consensus in a formal document (currently called a BCP).
> 
> I like this - it deals with the issue I had
> 
Very good, I canm live with that.
Harald... do we have consensus?

Bert
> Scott

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

Prev by Date: RE: Consensus? Minor issue #730: Section 2.2 - Authority over st andards development
Next by Date: RE: Consensus? Minor issue #743: Defining the IETF
Previous by thread: Consensus? Re: Issue: #751: Section 7 - Removability, using term "BCP"
Next by thread: Issue: #750: Section 6 - Budget, a cooperative process
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

RE: Issue: #751: Section 7 - Removability, using term "BCP"

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.