Re: [Ianaplan] Updated text Re: Please keep context in mind Re: Consensus call -- text reply for ICG proposal review

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

Richard,

On 8/24/15 7:03 PM, Richard Hill wrote:
> I object to Eliot's version, because it implies that this group has
> studied all parts of the ICG proposal and approves all parts.
>

I don't find this a credible objection.  For one thing, you have not
shown how the proposal would adversely impact the IETF.  Please ground
your criticism in specifics as relates to the IETF.

Eliot


> Best Richard
>
> On August 24, 2015 6:38:18 PM CEST, Eliot Lear <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>     Hi Leslie,
>
>     On 8/24/15 6:22 PM, Leslie Daigle (ThinkingCat) wrote:
>>
>>     Hi,
>>
>>     Bearing in mind the context below, it seems to us that the text
>>     currently under discussion for consensus (with thanks to Brian
>>     and Richard, all) is:
>>
>>     “The IETF IANAPLAN working group supports the draft ICG proposal
>>     going forward, as far as the Protocol Parameters function is
>>     concerned.  The IETF raised two transition points that are
>>     mentioned in Paragraph 3062 of the proposal.  We would ask that
>>     they be referenced in Part 0, Section V of the proposal as well.”
>
>     I don't think this text is there yet, so please class this as an
>     objection.  The issue remains that this reads as though we are
>     approving a single portion of text that we have contributed. 
>     Realistically I do not know how the ICG would take such a
>     comment.  It is akin to saying nothing, since support for the text
>     we contributed is well known.  And therefore, we would be better
>     off saying nothing.  Rather than do that, however, I propose an
>     alternative, as follows:
>
>         The IETF IANAPLAN working group has reviewed the ICG proposal
>         and found no concerns relating to our activities, and
>         therefore support its advancement on that basis.  The IETF
>         raised two transition points that are mentioned in Paragraph
>         3062 of the proposal.  We would ask that they be referenced in
>         Part 0, Section V of the proposal as well.
>
>
>     This makes clear that we are not making statements beyond how this
>     proposal will impact us.
>
>     Eliot
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>     Ianaplan mailing list
>     [e-mail]
>     https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan
>
> -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.