> -----Original Message----- > From: regext [mailto:regext-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of James Galvin > Sent: Friday, May 19, 2017 9:41 AM > To: Registration Protocols Extensions <regext@ietf.org> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] [regext] Proposed Changes to Milestones > > During the last IETF meeting we had a request to adopt another document. > As part of that discussion our AD expressed concern about the number of > documents currently on our list and the number of milestones currently on > our list. > > The Chairs took an action to review both of these and we now have a > proposal for consideration by the working group. > > To see the list of current milestones review this link: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/regext/about/ > > To see the list of current documents review this link: > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/regext/documents/ > > The Chairs have contacted the authors of all documents and asked for their > feedback regarding the status of their document, reviewed the current > proposed milestone dates, and propose the following. These are shown as > they are listed in the current milestones.
[snip] > Specific questions to the working group: > > 1. Do you agree with the proposed dates for milestones? If not, please > suggest other dates and indicate why you believe your date should be > preferred. If you agree, please show your support on the list. I support the proposed changes. One minor note: > draft-gould-change-poll (change to draft-ietf-regext-change-poll) > Needs more reviewers and implementation. Implementation isn't a requirement for WG adoption or publications as a Proposed Standard. As long as "needs ... implementation" means "nice to note if it exists", OK. > 2. Do you agree with the documents selected to be parked or dropped? If > not, please suggest a milestone date and indicate why you believe the > working group should keep this document on its milestone list. If you > agree, please show your support on the list. Yes, I agree with the proposed changes. > 3. Please suggest how you believe the working group should handle the > bundling and IDN drafts? Should they be kept together? Should they be > separated? Why or why not? Please also suggest a milestone date if you > believe we should keep one or more of these documents active. I would really like to hear more from the people who need these drafts before I form an opinion. Scott _______________________________________________ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
