Subject: Discover invited :-)

From: Ólafur Gudmundsson/DNSEXT co-chair <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 10:30:40 -0400

The Working group invites the authors of draft-ymbk-opcode-discover-02.txt
to submit that document as working group document with the copyright #1.
Please contact me for working group document assignment.

	Olafur

to unsubscribe send a message to [email-masked] with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.

---

From: Bill Manning <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 08:05:49 -0700 (PDT)

% The Working group invites the authors of draft-ymbk-opcode-discover-02.txt
% to submit that document as working group document with the copyright #1.
% Please contact me for working group document assignment.
% 
% 	Olafur

	There have been two similar solicitations.
	The first, right after the London IETF, generated zero input
	from the WG.  The second, issued about two weeks ago, generated
	one response in the negative.  Apathy with a slight negative 
	spin.

	So how can you state that the WG is making such an invitation?
	Perhaps you might better phrase this as; "One of the WG chairs..."
	instead of "The Working Group..."
	
	At this point, the documents work is already done. Its complete.
	Of what value will there be to treat this as WG fodder?  I'm not
	going to debate or change what was done two years ago.  Its 
	a matter of historical fact.  It would be a waste of WG, AD, and
	IESG members valuable time to reopen debate on what should or 
	should not have been done.

	If there really is interest in fixing DISCOVER, then it should
	recognize and build on prior work. The WG was completely uninterested
	when the work was occuring. If there is future interest, then it
	would be worthwhile allowing this draft to proceed as an 
	indivdual submission and then revisit the concepts as WG fodder
	when/if there is interest by others.

--bill