Re: WG ACTION: 2 weeks to discuss [LL63] Text could be more specific

Stuart,

You left out the context of LL46.

1) I presented the IESG concerns to the WG for discussion
2) We worked with the IESG members and had an opportunity to dissent
3) We closed the discussion

What is important in an IETF working group effort is to achieve at
least a rough consensus in a timely manner.  The process has been
open, fair and must be binding.

I am sure that if you had raised the point regarding the utility of the
text in March, you could have worked something out with Russ.  The point
is, it is now too late for this unless you have strong support from the
WG.

We will make any changes needed to correct errors in the document that
would prevent it from serving its intended purpose.  *All* changes at
this point must be passed with a strong WG consensus.  The existing
document with the agreed upon changes will be what is provided to the
IESG as the WG's recommendation to publish as an RFC.  If you feel that
this process has not been correct according to the IETF procedures and
policies you may of course appeal the output of the WG. 

Erik