Re: [RPSEC] Last Call For draft-ietf-rpsec-bgpsecrec-10.txt

Russ,

I'd like to point out that the great deal of discussion you reference  
was on the one topic that is not resolved in this draft. If the  
implication of moving this document on to publication is that this  
protracted discussion has to be replayed from scratch and word for  
word in another working group then I'd say that this was not a useful  
or desireable outcome. Is it really the view of the RPSEC Chairs that  
this is simply unresolveable?

(to be clear, I'm not for or against moving this draft onward as yet,  
but I am trying to understand if I should be!)

   Geoff

On 20/11/2008, at 1:46 AM, Russ White wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Folks:
>
> This draft has been around a long long time, and has been subject to a
> great deal of discussion. I would like to start a two week last call  
> on
> this one, at the end of which we'll forward this to the ADs for final
> preparations for publication.
>
> Please post any comments to the list.
>
> Thanks!
>
> :-)
>
> Russ
>
> - --
> russ@cisco.com CCIE CCDE <>< Grace Alone
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFJJCbOER27sUhU9OQRAuPyAJ9atVsVpZZKU7vef3OYpekRj1akXQCdHqYX
> 3wKIcfUUP6WNAiQizccc4A4=
> =ThSK
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> _______________________________________________
> RPSEC mailing list
> RPSEC@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec

_______________________________________________
RPSEC mailing list
RPSEC@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rpsec