On Jun 24, 2011, at 1:54 PM, Keith Moore wrote: > On Jun 24, 2011, at 4:46 PM, Doug Barton wrote: > >>> I've been reviewing the WGLC comments. I haven't finished doing so yet, >>> but so far my impression is that the discussion was both thorough and >>> well-organized. >> >> You might want to go further back in the archives than just the LC. There >> was quite a bit of discussion on both drafts. > > I've read some of it, and participated in some of the discussion for > -advisory. Though my immediate question has been whether the WG really had > rough consensus, and I don't think the other WG discussion matters too much > in gauging that.
The question of what the wg thought at the time of the wg last call is supposed to be captured in the document shepherd writeup. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-v6ops-6to4-to-historic/history/ I belive that in the case of this documents the unresolvable but understood objections present in the wg process around this document are specifically called out. > Keith > > _______________________________________________ > Ietf mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf > _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf
