Weak turnout : was-> A proposal for moving ahead on BC models

[Jim Boyle <jboyle@pdnets.com>]

Hopefully for other calls we can get better turnout than 9 members out of 
1100.


On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALABS wrote:

> 1. my count is 6 to 3.
> 2. a majority, yes, but a thin margin and small sample on which to base this decision...
> 
> Jerry
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Boyle [mailto:jboyle@pdnets.com]
> Sent: Saturday, January 18, 2003 10:21 PM
> To: te-wg@ops.ietf.org
> Subject: Re: A proposal for moving ahead on BC models (conclusion?)
> 
> For the record, I think it best to specify a default model.
> 
> However, assuming Sanjay's second vote masks his first, and including my 
> vote above, that would leave us with 6 folks who think we should pull the 
> requirement for a default, specified model, and 2 who think we should keep 
> it.  That gives us a voter turn-out on our list of less than 1% ;-(
> 
> So we'll update the requirements document (currently with IESG) to reflect 
> no need for a required default BC model.
> 
> Jim
> 
>