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

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

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