Re: Proposed IESG statement on draft-srisuresh-ospf-te-05.txt

[Alex Zinin <zinin@psg.com>]

Thomas,

  It seems to me we're safe here. Here's the posting from one of
  the WG chairs:

Friday, December 13, 2002, 8:52:46 AM, Rohit Dube wrote:
> Summary: There is insufficient interest to proceed any further with the
>          alternate ospf-te proposal in the ospf wg. [If anybody other
>          than the authors disagree with this please post to the list
>          indicating why you think an alternate ospf-te proposal is needed.]
  
  But I'll ping them, it's a good idea to do so.

-- 
Alex
http://www.psg.com/~zinin/

Wednesday, May 7, 2003, 6:24:51 AM, Thomas Narten wrote:
>> > Is this document really one that falls under the "interferes with WG?"

>> It is.

> And the WG chairs agree? (Or is this the big bad IESG making this
> decision  on its own...).

> I just want to be careful that we use "interferes" arguement
> carefully. If we don't, we risk the community saying it's just a way
> for the IESG to say no.

> Thomas