IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: Last Call: <draft-resnick-on-consensus-05.txt> (On Consensus and Humming in the IETF) to Informational RFC

"Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Fri, 11 October 2013 19:04 UTC

Return-Path: <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67D8421F853A for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 12:04:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.554
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.554 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.045, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W3ydrf6HsuuH for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 12:04:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (asmtp2.iomartmail.com [62.128.201.249]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52A7D21E808E for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 12:04:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from asmtp2.iomartmail.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r9BJ435U024160; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 20:04:03 +0100
Received: from 950129200 (dsl-sp-81-140-15-32.in-addr.broadbandscope.com [81.140.15.32]) (authenticated bits=0) by asmtp2.iomartmail.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r9BJ42SI024151 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 11 Oct 2013 20:04:03 +0100
From: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
To: Pete Resnick <presnick@qti.qualcomm.com>
Subject: RE: Last Call: <draft-resnick-on-consensus-05.txt> (On Consensus and Humming in the IETF) to Informational RFC
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 20:04:01 +0100
Message-ID: <04bd01cec6b4$a5e5d940$f1b18bc0$@olddog.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: Ac7Gs/m0O0z7wOjUSFWNTS230IDz2w==
Content-Language: en-gb
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: adrian@olddog.co.uk
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 19:04:12 -0000

Hi Pete,

At this point, a working week through the four week last call, I am wondering
whether the volume of comments and changes merit waiting for a revised version
before I do a last call review, or whether I should dive in with the current
version and risk raising a number of points already covered by others.

What do you think?

Thanks,
Adrian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email