Last Call: 'IETF Problem Statement' to Informational RFC

[avri at acm.org]

On tisdag, jan 6, 2004, at 10:26 Asia/Seoul, Keith Moore wrote:

>
>> To the group: Apart from this one message from John, and a "ship it"  
>> message from Brian, I have seen no further Last Call comments to the  
>> IETF list or the IESG list. Is this in line with your perceptions, or  
>> did my search of my mailboxes miss something?
>
> I submitted comments on November 20; they are in the list archives at
>
> http://eikenes.alvestrand.no/pipermail/problem-statement/2003- 
> November/003225.html
>
> since these appear to have been ignored by the WG management, (i.e.  
> the chairs declared "rough consensus" without even responding to these  
> comments), I believe IESG should consider them as comments for its  
> Last Call.


While we did call rough consensus despite your comments, and those of  
Todd Glassey and Alex Conta,  we did not ignore your comments and they  
were included in the report on the rough consensus:

http://eikenes.alvestrand.no/pipermail/problem-statement/2003-December/ 
003245.html

to which you commented, albeit not in agreement,:

http://eikenes.alvestrand.no/pipermail/problem-statement/2003-December/ 
003247.html

The discussion went on for a little bit after that, without, as far as  
I can tell, any support for your position.  I do, however, support your  
forwarding of your unresolved comments to the IESG during the IETF last  
call.

a.