On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Khaled Omar <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Can we just move the discussion(s) there? :) > > > > I wish to go discuss there, but where there. > > > The IRTF - The Internet Research Task Force mailto: [email protected] IDR: mailto: [email protected] routing-discussion mailto: [email protected] rtgwg (you already copied them, just move there) > > > > > *From:* rtgwg [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Christopher > Morrow > *Sent:* Thursday, December 21, 2017 6:39 PM > *To:* John C Klensin > *Cc:* rtgwg; Khaled Omar; ietf > *Subject:* Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? > > > > The actual problem here is that the draft discussion's don't actually > belong on the IETF@ list though... They belong in their respective WG > lists, or perhaps on the IRTF list. > > > > Can we just move the discussion(s) there? :) > > > > On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 10:56 AM, John C Klensin <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Folks, > > May I suggest that we wind this discussion thread down. > > Whether correct or not, analyses of Khaled's character are > probably not helpful and repetitive versions of them are less > so. The S/N ratio on the IETF list is never wonderful and this > thread should not contribute to making it worse. > > At least IMO, Khaled has been given a number of quite > constructive suggestions (both on-list and off) about how to > proceed if he wants to do so. Almost all of them include > focusing on a problem statement and/or a careful and reflect > literature review and analysis, but, if he wants to make > progress, he needs to understand the details of those > suggestions. > > Let's give him time to do that and see what, in the form of a > draft focused on those topics, he comes up with and, in the > process, try to reserve judgment about intentions, quality of > listening, etc. > > best, > john > > >
_______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
