[Pesci-discuss] PESCI is not moving

Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu> Tue, 01 November 2005 20:51 UTC

Received: from localhost.cnri.reston.va.us ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EX36F-00041w-Eh; Tue, 01 Nov 2005 15:51:19 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EX36A-0003xf-PF; Tue, 01 Nov 2005 15:51:15 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA14302; Tue, 1 Nov 2005 15:50:54 -0500 (EST)
Received: from h193007.nist.gov ([129.6.193.7] helo=carter-zimmerman.mit.edu) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EX3Kc-0002pn-5n; Tue, 01 Nov 2005 16:06:11 -0500
Received: by carter-zimmerman.mit.edu (Postfix, from userid 8042) id 59B69160009; Tue, 1 Nov 2005 15:51:11 -0500 (EST)
To: pesci-discuss@ietf.org, ipr-wg@ietf.org
From: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 15:51:11 -0500
Message-ID: <tslfyqg148w.fsf@cz.mit.edu>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: ffa9dfbbe7cc58b3fa6b8ae3e57b0aa3
Cc: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: [Pesci-discuss] PESCI is not moving
X-BeenThere: pesci-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Process Evolution Study Committee of the IETF discussion <pesci-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss>, <mailto:pesci-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/pesci-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:pesci-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pesci-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss>, <mailto:pesci-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: pesci-discuss-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: pesci-discuss-bounces@ietf.org


Hi.  THe IESG had a call today to discuss role of pesci in the
plenary.

People generally believed that it is too early to give more than a
brief status report on pesci.  Brian will let people know that he has
organized a design team, they had a draft, there was a BOF.  But we
feel that we'll be in a much better position to present specific
recommendations to the community later.

As such, there is no need to move pesci elsewhere.


I want to stress that this does not imply that pesci is not important
or that community input is not required.  It simply means we're too
early to focus a significant plenary discussion on pesci.  

I'm hoping to convince Brian to describe the process he thinks should
be used to approve pesci documents.  There's a bit of a problem in
that he won't be able the shepherd them.  So, he can make
recommendations about the process but until we pick document shepherds
no one can say anything definitive about the process.

--Sam


_______________________________________________
Pesci-discuss mailing list
Pesci-discuss@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss