On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 01:26:35PM -0500, Pete Resnick wrote: > On 10 Mar 2020, at 18:34, Nico Williams wrote: > > (A cynic might wonder if that choice was not purposeful, precisely to > > allow the original work to continue unimpeded [perhaps] on the ISE track > > with an appeal mooted. I do not believe that was the case.) > > As Paul alluded to, it all assume that the ISE accepts the documents. If > not, more fun may occur.
There was agreement that the WG would not oppose the two parties' submissions to the ISE on the topic. > > I wouldn't want to drag the ombudsman into this, but maybe that's the > > next best step. > > I would refer you to RFC 7776. I don't think this would be in the > ombudsteam's purview. (Not trying to get out of work, really!) I was suggesting updating that, not acting as though we already have :) Nico -- _______________________________________________ spring mailing list spring@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spring
