RE: [lemonade] Future Release a WG item or ind. submission

Ned asserted that the document was not part of the charter.  I incorrectly agreed, forgetting that we had debated this point and accepted the document as a WG item when we last met in greater Dallas almost two years ago.  So, there was discussion in the meeting about whether this was or was not a WG item.  It is fair to say the discussion was confused.

The current document is the result of incorporating comments received during WG last call. This is document is a WG work item and is now ready for IETF last-call (once the ID clears the publishing queue).

Greg V.

-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Hansen [mailto:tony@att.com]
Sent: Friday, March 24, 2006 1:51 AM
To: Chris Newman
Cc: lemonade@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [lemonade] Future Release a WG item or ind. submission

Sometimes we'll move on to the next slide, but then additional comments
will continue to be made on the previous topic. The log doesn't always
capture those flip flop situations.

	Tony Hansen
	tony@att.com

Chris Newman wrote:
> The jabber log was slightly out of order.  The discussion was about the
> object-based encryption proposal.
> 
>                - Chris
> 
> Greg White wrote on 3/22/06 20:52 -0600:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> I just read the jabber logs from today's Lemonade meeting.  Clip re: the
>> status of Future Release as a WG item:
>>
>> [11:51:24] <tonyhansen> slide #32: futuer delivery
>> [11:51:41] --- jr111 has joined
>> [11:51:55] <randy> Chris said he user case was interesting but
>> shouldn't be
>> a wg item
>> [11:52:01] <randy> s/he/his/
>> [11:52:51] <tonyhansen> ned: this doc is really not in charter; should
>> have
>> been in vpim; individual contrib so ok
>>
>>
>> I'm not sure I understand what Tony's version of what Ned said means,
>> but I
>> will point the group to
>> http://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/lemonade/current/msg00568.html ,
>> which
>> contains the minutes for the Interim Meeting in Richardson, TX in June
>> 2004.
>> At this meeting, it was voted that the document would be a WG item. 
>> Because
>> of this, I changed the name of the draft from
>> draft-vaudreuil-futuredelivery-02.txt to
>> draft-ietf-lemonade-futuredelivery-00.txt at the end of June 2004.  This
>> change has been noted in the change log at the end of the draft since
>> June
>> 2004.
>>
>> So, folks, what is the state of the draft?
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lemonade mailing list
> lemonade@ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade

_______________________________________________
lemonade mailing list
lemonade@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade

_______________________________________________
lemonade mailing list
lemonade@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade