Re: Summary of the LLMNR Last Call

[Robert Elz <kre at munnari.OZ.AU>]

    Date:        Sun, 18 Sep 2005 10:09:07 -0400
    From:        Margaret Wasserman <margaret at thingmagic.com>
    Message-ID:  <p0620071dbf52f99dab4c at [192.168.2.2]>

I am not going to comment on the substance of the issues, or the
doc in question, as I haven't been following what is happening with
it, nor have a read a recent version.

But ...

  | Based on these conclusions, I do not intend to forward the LLMNR 
  | specification to the IESG for review and approval.

What kind of process is going on here?    As I recall it, from rfc2026,
it is the IESG that issues last calls, when it has a doc for review, and
the IESG that decides if a last call has passed or not (that is, the IESG
takes input from the comments received during the last call to help it make
its decision on what to do with the doc that has been presented to it).

How did we ever get an IETF last call on a doc that hasn't even gone to
the IESG (apparently) but is still (apparently) under AD review ?

And how does one AD (alone, apparently) get to draw conclusions based upon
the results of the last call ?

What is happening here?   Can't the IETF manage to either follow its
own documented processes, or change them in the approved way?

kre



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