Re: 4646bis era

["Randy Presuhn" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Frank -

> From: "Frank Ellermann" <[e-mail]>
> To: <[e-mail]>
> Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 11:31 PM
> Subject: Re: 4646bis era
>
> John Cowan wrote:
> 
> > For this purpose we don't need the RFC to be published.
> > ietf-languages entered the 4646 epoch as soon as the
> > RFC was accepted and the new registry set up.
> 
> There was also the business of "finding" a volunteer for
> the job of an expert language *subtag* registry reviewer.
> 
> The existing language *tag* reviewer had to agree to this
> redefinition of his job, and the IESG had to appoint him.
> 
> And there was a bunch of appeals at different levels (IAB
> and IESG), that's why I mentioned "approval + sixty days"
> to sort stuff like this out.
> 
> IIRC one of the appeals was about the right hand side of
> the address of this list, another about a fixed typo in
> the RFC, a third about posting rights on this list or on
> the LTRU list, and so on ad nauseam.
> 
>  Frank

So, please, are you planning an appeal or not?

>From the sound of your postings, I currently *think*
you are, and we would consequently have to indicate
that to the IESG on the shepherd paperwork.  It would
be helpful to know just which appeals you plan, since that is not
all clear from your postings.  I'd like to avoid introducing
more delay, particularly if all this appeal talk is purely
hypothetical and you do not intend to mount an appeal.  Since
this discussion is really off-topic for this list, please
respond either to the ltru co-chairs or the ltru mailing list.

Randy
as ltru co-chair