Re: [Isis-wg] More support? Re: WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-sbfd-discriminator-02

["Les Ginsberg (ginsberg)" <[e-mail]>]

Some additional context here...

My remarks regarding expectations of support during last call are not specifically aimed at the SBFD draft nor the IS-IS WG. I see this change of behavior across multiple WGs and I am wondering why?
Some enlightenment from the ADs would be appreciated.

   Les


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Isis-wg [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Les Ginsberg
> (ginsberg)
> Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 7:57 AM
> To: Christian Hopps; ISIS-WG
> Subject: Re: [Isis-wg] More support? Re: WG Last Call for draft-ietf-isis-sbfd-
> discriminator-02
> 
> FWIW...
> 
> I support this as co-author.
> 
> But, it also seems relevant to comment on what seems to be a "behavior
> change".
> 
> In the past, expressions of support were expected when asking if a
> document should be made a WG item. However, once that happened, when
> a last call was issued it was only expected that folks should express
> reservations if they had any. Expressions of support for last call were not
> expected because it was assumed that since the WG had already been
> actively working on the document since it became a WG item support was
> implicit.
> 
> Now however it seems that there is an expectation that despite all of the
> history of the document post WG acceptance folks are supposed to once
> again say "Yes I support this".
> When did this behavior change and could the chairs and/or the ADs explain
> why the change was made?
> 
> Thanx.
> 
>    Les
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Isis-wg [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Christian
> > Hopps
> > Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2015 3:31 AM
> > To: ISIS-WG
> > Cc: [e-mail]
> > Subject: [Isis-wg] More support? Re: WG Last Call for
> > draft-ietf-isis-sbfd-
> > discriminator-02
> >
> >
> > Hi Folks,
> >
> > far there's not been much public indication of support for this draft.
> > It did clear WG last call and we can move it forward on the belief
> > that everyone is quietly accepting it; however, I would prefer it if a
> > few more people could be vocal in their support of the document.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Chris.
> >
> > Christian Hopps <[e-mail]> writes:
> >
> > > Hi Folks,
> > >
> > > We are starting a WG Last Call on the following draft.
> > >
> > > “Advertising S-BFD Discriminators in IS-IS”
> > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-isis-sbfd-discriminator/
> > >
> > > The LC is set to expire 3 weeks from now (allowing for common
> > > vacation
> > > time) on Friday, September 4th, 2015.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Chris & Hannes.
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Isis-wg mailing list
> > > [e-mail]
> > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Isis-wg mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg
> _______________________________________________
> Isis-wg mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/isis-wg