Re: [proto-team] Re: One more spin of draft-ietf-proto-wgchair-doc-shepherding

Inline...

	Henrik

on 2007-01-30 16:55 Lars Eggert said the following:
> On 2007-1-30, at 17:27, ext Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>> On 2007-01-24 17:06, Lars Eggert wrote:
>>> Open issues:
>>>   - Ted wanting to allow the possibility of shepherd teams
> 
> I think we explicitly wanted one clearly identified person, to avoid  
> having to chase down the shepherd-of-the-week.

Yes.

>>>   - Ted wanting to have section 6 removed (or rewritten)
> 
> Don't care much.
> 
>>>   - Sam and Cullen thinking that the appeals stuff in step 3.h is  
>>> too much
> 
> I think Sam has a point. When appeals come into the picture, the AD  
> needs to take over. What do others think?

I agree.

>>>   - Russ wanting to have security questions added to the writeup
>>
>> Does the team agree with Russ or want to push back? Why would we give
>> security a special place here, since we already have mandatory
>> security considerations? Can I add a question about IPv6 support?
>> Can you add one about congestion control? Where does this end?
> 
> Right. I wouldn't want this, and I think Russ is relaying a comment  
> from the audience.

Again, I agree.

>>>   - whether or not this should become an ION
>>
>> I guess we should put that question when the document is
>> otherwise clear of DISCUSSes.
> 
> I'm somewhat in favor of just letting it become an RFC. It's late in  
> the game to switch.

RFC.

>> One trivial thing:
>>
>>   The contact information for the Document Shepherd is also important	
>>   for the Gen-ART Directorate [GEN-ART]...
>>
>> Gen-ART is not formally a Directorate; it's just a team.
> 
> Fixed.
> 
> Lars

_______________________________________________
proto-team mailing list
proto-team@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/proto-team