Re: [Ianaplan] draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response moving to next step

Le 2014-11-27 à 03:57, Richard Hill <rhill@hill-a.ch> a écrit :
> 
> I note that section 3 of RFC 7282 states:
> 
> "The chair of a working group who is about to find that there is only rough
> consensus is going to have to decide that not only has the working group
> taken the objection seriously, but that it has fully examined the
> ramifications of not making a change to accommodate it, and that the outcome
> does not constitute a failure to meet the technical requirements of the
> work. ... A valid justification needs to me [sic] made."
> 
> Therefore, I would request that the co-chairs provide a justification for
> the conclusion that rough consensus has been achieved.

While the shepherd writeup is not to justify, the writeup that was recently submitted summarize it.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response/shepherdwriteup/

Regards, Marc.

> 
> Thanks and best,
> Richard
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ianaplan [mailto:ianaplan-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of Marc
>> Blanchet
>> Sent: mercredi, 26. novembre 2014 19:20
>> To: ianaplan@ietf.org
>> Cc: Jari Arrko
>> Subject: [Ianaplan] draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response moving to next step
>> 
>> 
>> Based on the working group last call comments and meeting, the
>> co-chairs have come to conclusion that the working group have
>> achieved rough concensus on the latest version of
>> draft-ietf-ianaplan-icg-response  (i.e. -07).  The shepherd is
>> entering his writeup. So the co-chairs have asked the AD to move
>> the document to the next step.
>> 
>> Regards, Marc&Leslie, co-chairs.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ianaplan mailing list
>> Ianaplan@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan
>> 