On 26/2/20 11:37, bruno.decra...@orange.com wrote:
Hi Robin,
I think that this was expected that this specific LC would last for more
than 2 weeks.
Summarizing and closing it is on my to do list. (I wish my to do list
were smaller, or that I throw more $$ or contributors on action items.
But wishing does not help much in my world.)
That been said, this does not change much with regards to technical
comments been raised:
-They are either addressed, non-addressed or pending
-they can be raised after the WG LC (e.g. during IETF LC or IESG review)
-they can even be raised after RFC publication. And eventually can led
to errata, bis document, deprecation…
So... is the plan to ship a document that violates RFC8200?
Should participants stop wasting time in constructive comments, and
rather work and prepare to submit a formal appeal, instead?
Thanks,
--
Fernando Gont
e-mail: ferna...@gont.com.ar || fg...@si6networks.com
PGP Fingerprint: 7809 84F5 322E 45C7 F1C9 3945 96EE A9EF D076 FFF1
_______________________________________________
spring mailing list
spring@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
