Subject: RE: Appeal to the IAB on the site-local issue

From: "Christian Huitema" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 22:11:40 -0700

> > Harald Tveit Alvestrand
> > But there's absolutely no doubt in my mind that the WG made a
> > decision, and that the chairs were procedurally correct in
> > recording that decision as the outcome of the meeting.
> 
> There many people, including some that actually _wrote_ the
procedures,
> that disagree with you. 

Please explain or retract. I was the note-taker during that particular
session, and I don't recall ever stating that the chair's decision did
not reflect the result of the meeting. 

-- Christian Huitema

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email-masked]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: "Michel Py" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2003 22:22:24 -0700

Christian,

>> Michel Py wrote: 
>> There many people, including some that actually _wrote_
>> the procedures, that disagree with you. 

> Christian Huitema wrote:
> Please explain or retract. I was the note-taker during that
> particular session, and I don't recall ever stating that the
> chair's decision did not reflect the result of the meeting.

Neither do I. I was not referring to you. By "_wrote_ the procedures", I
did not mean "wrote the proceedings".

As an example, I was referring to Scott Bradner's posts the; relation
with the procedure being that Scott is the editor of RFC2026; I do
acknowledge that Scott might not have been speaking as the editor of
RFC2026; nevertheless I consider (as many other people do) Scott as an
expert in terms of procedure.

Michel.