Re: Last Call: <draft-ietf-dhc-option-guidelines-14.txt> (Guidelines for Creating New DHCPv6 Options) to Best Current Practice

[SM <[e-mail]>]

At 08:36 25-10-2013, Barry Leiba wrote:
>Third, your second paragraph above is really out of line.  So let's
>back away a bit and look at the picture we're painting.

I looked at the Last Call comments and I found that the discussion 
has been between Cullen Jennings and Ted Lemon.  The initial message 
was addressed to OPS ADs.  It is IETF practice to watch the fireworks 
in such cases.  Joe Abley commented about the DNSSEC validation 
issue.  There was a long thread recently about that on some IETF mailing list.

The discussion then got down to process and there was a mention of 
the working group charter.  There was a comment about IETF 
Consensus.  There was then a question which was similar to a question 
on a different thread which was a little controversial.

This is the usual IETF recipe for discussions taking the wrong 
turn.  I'll step back a little.  The first version of this draft was 
posted in June 2007.  The intended status of that draft was 
Informational.  The intended status was change to Standards Track in 
December 2012.  It was changed to BCP in June 2013.

The picture being painted is that cross-area review is lacking.

Regards,
-sm