IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [GROW] draft-ietf-grow-simple-va

Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net> Sun, 29 April 2012 20:21 UTC

Return-Path: <robert@raszuk.net>
X-Original-To: grow@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: grow@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADDD221F84EA for <grow@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Apr 2012 13:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.546
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.546 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.054, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yhVcG0V-eYvz for <grow@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 29 Apr 2012 13:21:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail1310.opentransfer.com (mail1310.opentransfer.com [76.162.254.103]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5EA421F84D3 for <grow@ietf.org>; Sun, 29 Apr 2012 13:20:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 7406 invoked by uid 399); 29 Apr 2012 20:20:59 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO ?192.168.1.57?) (pbs:robert@raszuk.net@83.9.96.100) by mail1310.opentransfer.com with ESMTPM; 29 Apr 2012 20:20:59 -0000
X-Originating-IP: 83.9.96.100
Message-ID: <4F9DA2A9.7070301@raszuk.net>
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 22:20:57 +0200
From: Robert Raszuk <robert@raszuk.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120420 Thunderbird/12.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ronald Bonica <rbonica@juniper.net>
References: <13205C286662DE4387D9AF3AC30EF456D76AB92C3B@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net> <4F9BCB90.9090000@raszuk.net> <4F9C80BA.9040003@raszuk.net> <13205C286662DE4387D9AF3AC30EF456D76AD2906F@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net>
In-Reply-To: <13205C286662DE4387D9AF3AC30EF456D76AD2906F@EMBX01-WF.jnpr.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "grow@ietf.org" <grow@ietf.org>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [GROW] draft-ietf-grow-simple-va
X-BeenThere: grow@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: robert@raszuk.net
List-Id: Grow Working Group Mailing List <grow.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/grow>, <mailto:grow-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/grow>
List-Post: <mailto:grow@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:grow-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow>, <mailto:grow-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 20:21:00 -0000

Ronald,

This document as proven in my last email with real number got sufficient
attention already and there is no need for another last call.

Please explain why those documents require more community support then 
other documents issued as RFCs in the GROW WG.

The quote below was to evaluate what others understand by "sufficient
community support".

R.

> If we
>> think that we should move the discussion to ietf-interest or
>> similar bigger alias to discuss what community support for a given
>> work in IETF really means I will be happy to do that.
>>
>> Best regards, R.
>>
>
> Robert,
>
> This is a pretty good idea!
>
> So, I would ask the chairs to post another WG last call on both
> documents. In the last call, please mention that we are looking to
> gage community interest, so silence  will not be interpreted as
> consent.
>
> Robert, would you be willing to call attention to the last call on
> whatever mailing lists you think appropriate. The list ietf@ietf.org
> leaps to mind, but you might think of others, too.
>
> Ron
>
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email