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

On 25 Aug 2015, at 1:58, Richard Hill wrote:

> Building on Brian's proposal that the less said, the better, an 
> alternative would be to drop the first sentence altogether, so that 
> the text would read:
>
> “Regarding the draft ICG proposal, 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 think this one is too short. We shall support the whole initiative. 
This was also clear during the interim meeting.

Marc.

>
> Best,
> Richard
>
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Brian E Carpenter [mailto:brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 25, 2015 00:25
>> To: Stephen Farrell; Eliot Lear; Richard Hill; Leslie Daigle
>> (ThinkingCat); Ianaplan@Ietf. Org
>> Cc: Marc Blanchet
>> Subject: Re: [Ianaplan] Updated text Re: Please keep context in mind
>> Re: Consensus call -- text reply for ICG proposal review
>>
>> On 25/08/2015 08:19, Stephen Farrell wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 24/08/15 19:03, Eliot Lear wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 8/24/15 7:18 PM, Richard Hill wrote:
>>>>>> That's not my point. My point is that this group has not
>> considered
>>>>>> the other parts of the proposal, nor should it.
>>>> Andrew has already responded to you on that point.  And some of us
>>>> *have* considered the text on the whole.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think Eliot is clearly correct here. (Even though I prefer 
>>> Leslie's
>>> text over Eliot's.)
>>
>> Concur. The less said, the better, as far as *this WG* is concerned.
>>
>> I hope and trust that the IAB will tackle the broader issue, and I
>> think the community part of that discussion belongs on ietf@ietf.org.
>>
>>  Brian
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ianaplan mailing list
> Ianaplan@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ianaplan