Hi, On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 12:29:09PM +0100, Jan Zorz @ go6.si wrote:
On 2/20/13 11:50 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote:
On 20/02/2013 22:46, Tore Anderson wrote:
I wasn't aware that I had to repeat my statement of support for it to still count, but in any case - consider it done.
It's an oddity of the PDP. I'm not sure if it serves a useful purpose because at the times when there are piles of proposals flying around (e.g. now), people end up getting jaded by the requirement for constant acks and me-toos.
Agree... is this painful enough that we need to change it?
See my other e-mail on this topic - it serves a purpose, as the proposal might have changed significantly when entering review phase, or the impact analysis might have turned up some "unintended consequences". Plus, usually there is not so strong "yes, make it happen, now!" support in the discussion phase, but more of an actual *discussion* :-) These two proposals (2012-09 and 2012-10) are untypical. Gert Doering -- NetMaster -- have you enabled IPv6 on something today...? SpaceNet AG Vorstand: Sebastian v. Bomhard Joseph-Dollinger-Bogen 14 Aufsichtsratsvors.: A. Grundner-Culemann D-80807 Muenchen HRB: 136055 (AG Muenchen) Tel: +49 (89) 32356-444 USt-IdNr.: DE813185279