Re: [alto] Second WGLC for cost-calendar

[Vijay Gurbani <[e-mail]>]

Folks: The WGLC period is about to expire and so far no one has posted
anything to the list.  It is imperative that we have some folks looking at
the drafts as we move them along.  I do realize everyone is busy, please
kindly take a few minutes to look at the diffs and post anything that seems
remiss to the list.

Thank you.

On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 9:54 AM Vijay Gurbani <[e-mail]>
wrote:

> Folks: During the IESG review of cost-calendar, substantial comments were
> made that requires a second WGLC for this draft.  Pursuant to the second
> WGLC, we will resend the draft to the IESG.
>
> The IESG comments are captured in [1].  The authors of cost-calendar have
> revised the draft to address these comments and the new draft (version -10)
> is available at [2].
>
> This email serves as a second WGLC for cost-calendar and will run from
> Mon, Feb 11 2019 to Mon, Feb 25 2019.  During this two week period, please
> examine carefully the revised version and post any comments or discussions
> to the list, even if you have no comments, a simple email to the list
> saying that you have examined the changes and the draft is ready to proceed
> is helpful.
>
> To help you save time, you can examine the diffs between -09 and -10 at
> [3].
>
> Thank you.
>
> [1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar/ballot/
> [2] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar/
> [3]
> https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-alto-cost-calendar-10.txt
>