[ppml] Policy Proposal 2007-22: Expand timeframe of Additional Requests - Second Last Call

[Leo Bicknell]

Typically proposals in last call receive very few comments.  I would
like to think this is a result of our policy process being quite
successful and leaving very little to discuss during the last call
time.

In this particular case there was some confusion over language.
This was due to changes at the meeting and due to a mistake in
getting the text posted to PPML.  Because of this, the AC would
find it useful in this particular case for several people to chime
in with "yes, we believe that was the proposal we discussed, and
yes, we believe there was community support."  Of course, if you
believe that was not the case, feel free to post your opinion as
well.

We're working behind the scenes to try and make sure this never happens
again.  Our apologies for the mix up.

-- 
       Leo Bicknell - bicknell at ufp.org - CCIE 3440
        PGP keys at http://www.ufp.org/~bicknell/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-ppml/attachments/20080211/f4c4fba6/attachment.sig>