Subject: Re: [nfsv4] draft-ietf-nfsv4-mv1-msns-update

From: David Noveck <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2019 10:50:02 -0500

It's now over three weeks since the end of working group last call and the
document is still in WGLC and no steps have been taken either to move the
document forward or indicate reasons why it should not move forward.  If
there are are issues that need to be addressed, please let me know what
they are.

Normally,  I would have sent weekly reminders but two-weeks-after-WGLC
turned out to be Chistmas Eve and three-weeks-after turned out to be New
years Eve.  So I skipped those and am sending out the three-weeks-after
reminder a bit late.   I will send our another reminder if necessary on
1/10, one month after the end of WGLC.

On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 12:20 PM David Noveck <[email-masked]> wrote:

> IIRC, Working Group Last Call on this document ended a week ago.
>
> Could you please update the document state, to reflect the results of Last
> Call.   Since there were no additional  comments, I believe Last Call
> completed successfully and we should move on to the next step, which as I
> understand it, requires you to produce a write-up.
>
> Once that is done, I believe it is up to Spencer D. to review the documemt
> after which it can follow mv0-trunking-update in being considered by the
> IESG.  Also, somewhere in there, a document shephered needs to be
> designated.
>

---

From: spencer shepler <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2019 10:17:35 -0800

I have been on vacation since Dec 13th, Dave. I will return to the office
on Monday Jan 7th and this task will be on my list.

Spencer

On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 7:50 AM David Noveck <[email-masked]> wrote:

>> Could you please update the document state, to reflect the results of
>> Last Call.   Since there were no additional  comments, I believe Last Call
>> Once that is done, I believe it is up to Spencer D. to review the
>> documemt after which it can follow mv0-trunking-update in being considered
>> by the IESG.  Also, somewhere in there, a document shephered needs to be
>> designated.
>>
>

---

From: David Noveck <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2019 09:28:36 -0500

> I will return to the office on Monday Jan 7th and this task will be on my
list

Given that you have been back a week now and no action has yet been taken,
I am sending an additional reminder regarding the need to move forward on
this.

It is now five weeks since the end of working group last call and the
document is still recorded as being in WGLC and no steps have been taken
either to move the document forward or indicate reasons why it should not
move forward.  If there are are issues that need to be addressed, please
let me know what they are.

On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 1:17 PM spencer shepler <[email-masked]>
wrote:

>> It's now over three weeks since the end of working group last call and
>> the document is still in WGLC and no steps have been taken either to move
>> the document forward or indicate reasons why it should not move forward.
>> If there are are issues that need to be addressed, please let me know what
>> they are.
>>

---

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2019 06:11:27 -0600

Just as an AD interrupt ...

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019, 08:28 David Noveck <[email-masked] wrote:

> > I will return to the office on Monday Jan 7th and this task will be on
> my list
>

I step down as the responsible AD for NFSv4 in mid-March, which (I think)
barely leaves enough time for AD Evaluation, IETF Last Call (two weeks),
and an IESG telechat cycle before I would have to hand this document off to
Mirja or Magnus (they haven't divided up WG responsibility yet) and give
them time to catch up - for instance, a new responsible AD might do another
AD Evaluation before IETF Last Call, etc.

That might or might not matter, but if it does matter ... now, you know ...

Make good choices.

Spencer