RE: Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-sermersheim-ldap-csn-00.txt
"Jim Sermersheim" <[email protected]> Thu, 08 Jan 2004 18:10:18 -0700
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.ldup |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
This is a MIME message. If you are reading this text, you may want to consider changing to a mail reader or gateway that understands how to properly handle MIME multipart messages. --=__Part3F61F06A.1__= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >>> "Chris Apple" <[email protected]> 12/23/03 8:45:23 AM >>> >The Editors of all LDUP WG documents with a dependency on the content >included in this draft should produce revisions of their documents within = the >same time frame so that we can proceed with WG Last Calls on them. > >Higher priority documents would of course be those to be included in the >First Grouping identified in the meeting minutes posted to the WG Mailing = List. > >I note that this is exactly the kind of dependency/risk I did not want to = introduce >by allowing an additional dependency on a non-WG document. Per previous >direction from John and myself, the specification you have published was >supposed to have been published as an LDUP WG document regardless >of its more general applicability. > >However, In the interest of moving things forward, I will not pursue the = issue >of converting the document to an LDUP WG deliverable. =20 It's no big deal, I can re-submit it as a WG document if you'd like. I = think we waffled around so much regarding the WG status and whether it = should be Standards-Track, Informational, or Experimental, that I = mis-remembered the outcome. There's no email-trail so I just submitted as = I thought we had decided * I should have double checked. =20 Let me know if you want me to submit as a WG doc, and what the intended = category should be. The old one will just vaproize on its own. =20 Jim =20 =20 --=__Part3F61F06A.1__= Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Message</TITLE> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-1"= > <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1276" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD> <BODY style=3D"MARGIN: 4px 4px 1px; FONT: 10pt Microsoft Sans Serif">>&g= t;> "Chris Apple" <[email protected]> 12/23/03 8:45:23 AM = >>><BR> <DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt Microsoft Sans Serif; COLOR: #000000"> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>>The Editors of all LDUP WG = documents with a dependency on the content</SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>>included in this draft should = produce revisions of their </SPAN><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>document= s within the</SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>>same time frame so that we can = proceed with WG Last Calls on them.</SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>>Higher priority documents would = of course be those to be </SPAN><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>included = in the</SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>>First Grouping identified in the = meeting minutes posted to the </SPAN><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>WG = Mailing List.</SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>>I note that this is exactly the = kind of dependency/risk I did not want to introduce</SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>>by allowing an additional = dependency on a non-WG document. Per previous</SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>>direction from John and myself, = the specification </SPAN><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>you have = published was</SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>>supposed to have been published = as an LDUP WG </SPAN><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>document regardless</= SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>>of its more general applicability= .</SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>></SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>>However, In the interest of = moving things forward, I will not pursue the issue</SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>>of converting the document to an = LDUP WG deliverable.</SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>It's no big deal, I can re-submit it = as a WG document if you'd like. I think we waffled around so much = regarding the WG status and whether it should be Standards-Track, = Informational, or Experimental, that I mis-remembered the outcome. There's = no email-trail so I just submitted as I thought we had decided =97 I = should have double checked.</SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>Let me know if you want me to submit = as a WG doc, and what the intended category should be. The old one will = just vaproize on its own.</SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003>Jim</SPAN></DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=3D877083515-23122003></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML> --=__Part3F61F06A.1__=--