On 05/03/2010, at 4:59 PM, <[email protected]>
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Dear Terry and all,
>> I was thinking, glibly, that this would mimic the PDP in some
>> way... (ie multiple consensus points to allow all stakeholder
>> review and comment? yes? no?)
> I agree with you that the PDP is ideal way if we didn't need to consider the
> However, the timeline is very limited actually, since we should submit this
> as a contribution for next ITU IPv6 meeting on 15-16 Mar. (Otherwise, it will
> not be discussed)
> Original submission deadline was this Tue., and ITU kindly accepted to
> postpone it,
> but still it is TODAY.
That is indeed a shame.. :-(
> Also, I would like to point out that there was many voices from the floor to
> asking consensus in the session, while I hesitated.
> So, I believe, remaining way is only making contribution based on agreed
> statement text in the session.
> Of course, we can modify not so substantial points, but we should keep key
> This is the reason why I suggested you to writing your submission.
apnic-talk mailing list