Re: [spring] WG adoption call completion for https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gandhi-spring-stamp-srpm/

Dear WG Chairs, Martin, and  All,
as I recall it, the document that was called for the adoption was on the Informational track. I was quite surprised that the authors switched that to the Standards track in -07. But that is not what the WG discussed, and, in my opinion, that may be a violation of the IETF process. We had an earlier discussion with the authors and, as it appeared, have reached the agreement that the work will be on the Informational or Experimental track. The authors decided to break that agreement. Hence, I ask the WG Chairs not to adopt this draft as a Standard track document.

Regards,
Greg Mirsky
Sr. Standardization Expert
预研标准部/有线研究院/有线产品经营部  Standard Preresearch Dept./Wireline Product R&D Institute/Wireline Product Operation Division
E: gregory.mirsky@ztetx.com
www.zte.com.cn
------------------Original Mail------------------
Sender: JamesGuichard
To: spring@ietf.org;
CC: spring-chairs@ietf.org;
Date: 2021/07/06 08:08
Subject: [spring] WG adoption call completion for https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gandhi-spring-stamp-srpm/
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring

Dear WG:
This email ends the WG adoption call for  https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-gandhi-spring-stamp-srpm/. Thank you for your feedback and comments.
Having reviewed the mailing list responses, the chairs believe that there is enough support for adoption of this document into the WG. Therefore authors please resubmit the document as draft-spring-stamp-srpm-00.
Note: there were several comments received during the adoption call that appear to have been addressed by the authors in v07 (just posted). However, if any comments/concerns are still outstanding  then we expect to see those resolved as part of the WG process and ask that the authors of this document please work with the people that commented to resolve any open issues.
Finally, authors please indicate on the mailing list whether you are aware of any undisclosed IPR relevant to this document.
Thanks!
Jim, Joel & Bruno