In-line.....
On 9/15/09 4:41 PM, "Winterbottom, James" <James.Winterbottom@andrew.com>
wrote:
> Hi Marc,
>
>
>
> A few things. Firstly the HUM was adoption or rejection, your post was
> non-committal, it wasn't a call for comments, it was a HUM.
Correct, there never was a call for comments on version 10 of the draft.
Normal IETF procedure is for a new version of an individual draft to be
announced to the WG mail list to solicit comments prior to any HUM asking if
it's ready to be elevated to a WG document. Since version 10 of the
individual draft was never announced to the GeoPriv list, my comments were
appropriate and coincide with my comments for several of the previous
versions.
>
>
>
> Martin posted an explicit email about your comments yesterday.
Interesting, email must be in some strange time-warp problem. Martin's
email showed up 5 hours after yours.
-Marc-
snip.................
_______________________________________________
Geopriv mailing list
Geopriv@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geopriv
