Subject: [babel] Warren Kumari's DISCUSS on draft-ietf-babel-v4viav6-07

From: Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2022 18:13:07 -0500

Hi,

As you have seen, Warren Kumari is currently blocking this draft,
which the IESG will be considering during their telechat tomorrow. The
best solution at this point would seem to be to change the status of
the draft to Experimental.

Juliusz: I assume you have no objection to this since that was the
status you originally suggested.

Does anyone else object, given the circumstances, to changing the
target status of this draft to Experimental?

Thanks,
Donald
===============================
 Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-333-2270 (cell)
 2386 Panoramic Circle, Apopka, FL 32703 USA
 [email-masked]

---

From: David Schinazi <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2022 15:21:43 -0800

I'm personally OK with either Experimental or Standards Track.
However, I would suggest confirming with Warren whether that
change would be sufficient for him to clear his DISCUSS before
we actually make the change.

David

On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 3:13 PM Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> babel mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/babel
>

---

From: Donald Eastlake <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2022 18:50:20 -0500

Hi David,

Thanks for the response. Presumably our AD, Martin, could suggest
going to Experimental during consideration of the draft by the IESG
tomorrow. I'll also respond to Warren and cc Roman Danyliw who is
supporting Warren's DISCUSS.

Thanks,
Donald

---

From: Juliusz Chroboczek <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2022 10:34:59 +0100

> status you originally suggested.

Yes, I think it's a good idea.  I think it would also address the
misgivings of Robert Wilton and Roman Danyliw.

-- Juliusz

---

From: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2022 14:19:02 +0100

> target status of this draft to Experimental?

I think it may be overly cautious, but that is more of a side note than
an actual objection. So sure, fine with me :)

-Toke