[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Google
  Web www.spinics.net

Re: Proposed IESG Statement on the Conclusion of Experiments



Another '+1' from me.

I see the benefits in publishing reports, and I don't object to cleaning up
code-points or allocated resources so long is there is _very_ careful review
before hand.

.. but rushing through this now, could do more harm later.

T.


On 20/04/12 10:01 AM, "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx [mailto:ietf-bounces@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Lixia
>> Zhang
>> Sent: Thursday, April 19, 2012 4:48 PM
>> To: SM
>> Cc: adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxx; ietf@xxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: Proposed IESG Statement on the Conclusion of Experiments
>> 
>>>> The IESG would welcome your thoughts on this draft before they
>>>> approve the final text on April 26th.
>>> 
>>> Could the IESG defer approval by a month for the case study?
>> 
>> I would like to second this suggestion
>> (or did IESG have any specific reason to rush?)
> 
> +1.
> 
> -MSK

<<attachment: smime.p7s>>


[IETF Annoucements]     [IETF Obscurity Interest]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux]     [Pilates]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]

Add to Google