Hi,
I completely agree with Peter.
Yours Irrespectively,
John
> -Original Message-
> From: Lsr On Behalf Of Peter Psenak
> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2019 2:30 AM
> To: Huaimo Chen ; Acee Lindem (acee)
> ; Christian Hopps ; lsr@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [Lsr] Moving Forward [Re: Floodi
Hi folks,
It's not useful for people to be adding a bunch of extra qualifications and
caveats to the adoption poll.
This is not a dual adoption poll. We are not calling for adoption of an
unwritten, unfinished algorithm document. That makes no sense; we adopt
reviewed acceptable work, not th
Chris,
Well put.
Yours Irrespectively,
John
> -Original Message-
> From: Lsr On Behalf Of Christian Hopps
> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2019 10:56 AM
> To: lsr@ietf.org
> Cc: lsr-cha...@ietf.org; lsr-...@ietf.org; 'Christian Hopps'
> ; Aijun Wang
> Subject: Re: [Lsr] 答复: WG Adoption
Speaking as a WG member,
I just re-read section 6.7 and all the actions for distributed computation are
pretty much intuitive corollaries for the actions for the centralized solution.
I see no real reason to remove these. However, there is nothing to prevent
improvements to be proposed in an a
Hi All,
In favor of adopting both drafts in parallel, and then one draft focuses on
the centralized solution and the other on the distributed solution.
Best regards,
Lei
On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 2:47 AM Christian Hopps wrote:
>
> Hi Folks,
>
> We are starting a 2 week adoption call on draft-li-
Support.
Thanks
Mankamana
-Original Message-
From: Lsr on behalf of Christian Hopps
Date: Monday, February 11, 2019 at 2:47 AM
To: "lsr@ietf.org"
Cc: "lsr-cha...@ietf.org" , "lsr-...@ietf.org"
, "cho...@chopps.org"
Subject: [Lsr] WG Adoption Call for draft-li-lsr-dynamic-flood
