[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: WG Last Call reissuing: draft-ietf-rules-update-07

To: Harald Alvestrand <harald at alvestrand.no>
Subject: Re: WG Last Call reissuing: draft-ietf-rules-update-07
From: Scott W Brim <sbrim at cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 11:05:24 -0400
Authentication-results: rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com; header.From=sbrim@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( sig from cisco.com verified; );
Cc: ipr-wg at ietf.org
Dkim-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; l=727; t=1155308724; x=1156172724; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=sbrim@cisco.com; z=From:Scott=20W=20Brim=20<sbrim@cisco.com> |Subject:Re=3A=20WG=20Last=20Call=20reissuing=3A=20draft-ietf-rules-update-07 |To:Harald=20Alvestrand=20<harald@alvestrand.no>; X=v=3Dcisco.com=3B=20h=3DiSvxy2p+MyyIZ5I8uE6tlCZ1WVE=3D; b=U95JPrfnxjPZItSZBPbkBLUwJ+0rPiymI+w8F75ebO+PlNE5Ya9jo5FXj3/RkoGPS+ZD01kD Dxmas6D45yXADBLM4OXdVnNqAMiKEMPsmnn5t8z4jTIATK6yvt403tDI;
In-reply-to: <44DC587E.5050508@alvestrand.no>
List-help: <mailto:ipr-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-id: IPR-WG <ipr-wg.ietf.org>
List-post: <mailto:ipr-wg@ietf.org>
List-subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg>, <mailto:ipr-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg>, <mailto:ipr-wg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
Organization: Cisco Systems, Inc.
References: <44DC587E.5050508@alvestrand.no>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.5) Gecko/20060719 Thunderbird/1.5.0.5 Mnenhy/0.7.4.0

On 08/11/2006 06:14 AM, Harald Alvestrand allegedly wrote:
> I cannot draw a conclusion from this discussion. It is not clear to me
> that any substantive issues that can be resolved by changes to the
> document under discussion have been raised and remain a consensus
> concern for the WG.

Agree

> Given that the discussion was inconclusive, and that the issue of the
> Trust update is of some urgency, I am reissuing a Last Call and am
> asking for a simple answer from all participants:
> 
> A - Go forward with draft-ietf-ipr-rules-update-07
> B - Go forward with draft-ietf-ipr-ietf-trust-update-00
> C - I refuse to support either option

A.

If A doesn't get enough support then I am not against B.

_______________________________________________
Ipr-wg mailing list
Ipr-wg at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipr-wg

Follow-Ups:
- Re: WG Last Call reissuing: draft-ietf-rules-update-07
  - From: todd glassey

References:
- WG Last Call reissuing: draft-ietf-rules-update-07
  - From: Harald Alvestrand

Prev by Date: Re: WG Last Call reissuing: draft-ietf-rules-update-07
Next by Date: Re: WG Last Call reissuing: draft-ietf-rules-update-07
Previous by thread: Re: WG Last Call reissuing: draft-ietf-rules-update-07
Next by thread: Re: WG Last Call reissuing: draft-ietf-rules-update-07
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread