Re: [alto] Adopting two I-Ds as WG documents

["Vijay K. Gurbani" <[e-mail]>]

Woundy, Richard wrote:
>> I don't think there is a deadline for objecting to an I-D.
> 
> You are correct that objections may come at any time in the lifecycle of
> an I-D (and errata can be posted against an RFC).
> 
> But it does help to set a "weak deadline" for objections to accepting
> these documents as WG drafts, for a few reasons:
[...]

Ah, OK.  I am with you now, Rich.

So, after consultation with my other esteemed co-chairs, let
me issue a clarification on my prior email:

OLD:

   Please post on the list if there is any objection to moving the
   above two drafts ahead.

NEW:

   Please post on the list if there is any objection to moving the
   above two drafts ahead.  If there are no objections by **Wednesday,
   April 15th, 2009,** draft-marocco-alto-problem-statement-05 and
   draft-kiesel-alto-reqs-02 will be accepted as WG documents
   fulfilling the "problem statement" and "requirements"
   deliverables, respectively.

> -- Rich, a former WG co-chair :)

- vijay, learning the ropes of being a WG co-chair ;-)
-- 
Vijay K. Gurbani, Bell Laboratories, Alcatel-Lucent
1960 Lucent Lane, Rm. 9C-533, Naperville, Illinois 60566 (USA)
Email: vkg@{alcatel-lucent.com,bell-labs.com,acm.org}
Web:   http://ect.bell-labs.com/who/vkg/