Re: Issue: Transition rules?

[Brian E Carpenter <brc@zurich.ibm.com>]

Just a reminder: ISOC Board electronic votes normally take two weeks.
That's not an unreasonable delay, if people feel Ran is correct. 
However, in the past the IESG formal decision to approve the BCP
has been the signal for implementation. So I think I agree with Scott.

   Brian

RJ Atkinson wrote:
> 
> On Monday, Oct 13, 2003, at 14:03 America/Montreal, Scott Bradner wrote:
> > I just point out, as Harald did, that the ISOC board step is to
> > accept the IETF process -- so by simple English the process would
> > have to be already current before the ISOC BoT could accept it as
> > current
> 
> Nice twisting of words on your part since it is hardly "by simple
> English"
> to go from "IESG and ISOC BOT must approve before changes take
> effect" to "IESG only must approve before changes take effect".
> 
> Bottom line is that we disagree.  I still believe the new rules
> cannot take effect until after ISOC BOT has formally approved them,
> in addition to the IESG.
> 
> Probably not worth a lot more back and forth on this list,
> since I think both views have been clearly put forward now.
> 
> Yours,
> 
> Ran
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.elistx.com/subscribe>

-- 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Brian E Carpenter 
Distinguished Engineer, Internet Standards & Technology, IBM 

NEW ADDRESS <brc@zurich.ibm.com> PLEASE UPDATE ADDRESS BOOK