Hi all, Other thoughts? I think it's important as document shepherd to know whether we should move on or not.
Kind regards Pieter > On 21 May 2018, at 05:19, Patrick Mevzek <p...@dotandco.com> wrote: > > On Fri, May 11, 2018, at 15:32, James Galvin wrote: >> With that, version 06 of this document has been published and the chairs >> are declaring WGLC closed. The document is now ready for submission to >> IESG for consideration as a Proposed Standard. > > Isn't that a little rushed? > >> From a quick search I have found about only 2 explicit mention of support of >> this document, from Pieter and Scott (as for myself I can not say I >> explicitely support it because I am still uneasy by the need for it or not >> seeing it and still not understanding some part of it like all the "role" >> part). > > Also the document went into so many iterations during the period that it was > basicaly impossible to follow > (one night I have tried reviewing its newest version by implementing it in my > client... to find out in the morning that a new version went out so I kind of > decided to stop giving it my time before it stabilizes in some way); some new > comments even just popped out on the mailing-list yesterday. > > So I feel uneasy process-wise. Based on the amount of iterations during WGLC > it looks like to me that there is at least still some work needed on it, and > I am not sure its current version correspond really to the working group > consensus. > > The above applies the same way for the two "organization" documents. > > -- > Patrick Mevzek > > _______________________________________________ > regext mailing list > regext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext _______________________________________________ regext mailing list regext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/regext
