| Thread Links | Date Links | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thread Prev | Thread Next | Thread Index | Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index |
|
All, recall the updated timeline from the March meeting. It shows us submitting for Sponsor Ballot in July. This means we have one last comment cycle to get this complete and one more review to
confirm that we did. Someone asked me in another thread what it took for us to get to SB, wrt comments. Here was my reply: For this review, you make them as you deem them. Is it an editorial change or is it technical? (so is it a typo or does changing it change operation and we were looking
for that). At this point, I’d hope we’d have covered most of the T stuff, but that doesn’t mean we won’t have some against 2.4. As for R or not, that is also your judgement. Is this something that is broken that we should definitely fix before we go to SB (and if yes, then it’s an R) or is it something
that might make it easier to read but we don’t have to change it? When you step back and look at where we are right now, I would expect most D2.4 comments to be ERs. And I would expect all comments to be R’s. If it’s something you’re
happy with not changing then save it for D3.0. I will be using these guidelines as I comment against D2.4. Please consider doing the same. Thanks, Chad Jones Tech Lead, Cisco Systems Chair, IEEE P802.3bt 4PPoE Task Force |