Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

2017-12-21 Thread Alexander Vainshtein
+1.Sasha Vainshtein Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 17:57, John C Klensin 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

RE: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

2017-12-21 Thread Khaled Omar
: Thursday, December 21, 2017 6:59 PM To: Khaled Omar Cc: John C Klensin; ietf; rtgwg Subject: Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.o...@hotmail.com<mailto:eng.khaled.o...@hotmail.com>> wrote: > Can we just move t

Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

2017-12-21 Thread Christopher Morrow
9 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 &

Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

2017-12-21 Thread Christopher Morrow
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 wrote:

Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

2017-12-21 Thread John C Klensin
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

Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

2017-12-21 Thread Ted Lemon
On Dec 21, 2017, at 4:21 AM, Khaled Omar wrote: > As I said before, I don't mind to join a discussion if the topic is > interesting and its information is clear, but I was tired of asking for > technical discussion so it will take the drafts forward. You haven't

Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

2017-12-21 Thread Dick Franks
On 21 December 2017 at 09:21, Khaled Omar wrote: > > Another very valuable thing to do is just sit and listen to people talk > about problems in the IETF, and then see if you can come up with a small, > narrowly scoped proposal that will help to solve one of those

RE: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

2017-12-21 Thread Khaled Omar
ailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Ted Lemon Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2017 6:07 PM To: Khaled Omar Cc: ietf; rtgwg Subject: Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? On Dec 20, 2017, at 9:18 AM, Andrew Allen <aal...@blackberry.com> wrote: > So I think your first task is to wr

Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

2017-12-20 Thread Ted Lemon
On Dec 20, 2017, at 9:18 AM, Andrew Allen wrote: > So I think your first task is to write a draft that clearly explains the > problems and the requirements to solve those problems without addressing the > specifics of the solutions you envision and then achieve consensus

RE: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

2017-12-20 Thread Andrew Allen
017 3:55 PM To: Christer Holmberg; Robert Wilton; Khaled Omar Cc: ietf; rtgwg Subject: RE: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? IMHO a draft that identifies the current problems separate from the draft that proposes solutions is probably the best way forward. Then the discussion c

RE: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

2017-12-20 Thread Andrew Allen
To: Robert Wilton <rwil...@cisco.com>; Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.o...@hotmail.com> Cc: ietf <i...@ietf.org>; rtgwg <rtgwg@ietf.org> Subject: Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Hi, >As a relative newcomer to IETF, I can perhaps give two (hopefully >positive) sug

RE: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

2017-12-20 Thread Khaled Omar
gwg Subject: Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? On 20/12/2017 11:27, Khaled Omar wrote: Hi Robert, It is true, i'll address these questions and will replace the existing text with a clear introduction about a comparison between KRP and BGP and between NEP and other IGPs so it can

Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

2017-12-20 Thread Robert Wilton
it all wrong and you have thought of a better solution. Kind regards, Rob Original Message Subject: Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? From: Robert Wilton To: Khaled Omar CC: ietf ,rtgwg Hi Khaled, As a relative newcomer to IETF, I can perhaps give two

RE: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

2017-12-20 Thread UTTARO, JAMES
: Wednesday, December 20, 2017 6:13 AM To: Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.o...@hotmail.com> Cc: ietf <i...@ietf.org>; rtgwg <rtgwg@ietf.org> Subject: Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Hi Khaled, As a relative newcomer to IETF, I can perhaps give two (hopefully positive)

Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

2017-12-20 Thread Christer Holmberg
Hi, >As a relative newcomer to IETF, I can perhaps give two (hopefully >positive) suggestions (sorry, none of which is technical): > >(1) From taking a very quick look at your drafts, it may be helpful to >have three sections at the top of the drafts that answer these 3 >questions (before you

Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

2017-12-20 Thread Robert Wilton
Hi Khaled, As a relative newcomer to IETF, I can perhaps give two (hopefully positive) suggestions (sorry, none of which is technical): (1) From taking a very quick look at your drafts, it may be helpful to have three sections at the top of the drafts that answer these 3 questions (before

Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

2017-12-19 Thread Ladislav Lhotka
On Tue, 2017-12-19 at 22:04 +0100, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote: > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 08:46:29PM +, > Khaled Omar wrote > a message of 14 lines which said: > > > I noticed that the IETF participants gives only negative comments > > regarding the submitted

Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

2017-12-19 Thread Khaled Omar
Khaled Original Message Subject: Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Khaled Omar CC: ietf ,rtgwg On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 08:46:29PM +, Khaled Omar wrote a message of 14 lines which said: > I noticed that the IETF participants gives only

Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

2017-12-19 Thread Khaled Omar
s been stopped, but with KRP and NEP I received almost nothing thats why I'm asking for decisions regarding the discussion. Original Message Subject: Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? From: Stephane Bortzmeyer To: Khaled Omar CC: ietf ,rtgwg On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at

Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?

2017-12-19 Thread Stephane Bortzmeyer
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 08:46:29PM +, Khaled Omar wrote a message of 14 lines which said: > I noticed that the IETF participants gives only negative comments > regarding the submitted IDs, that is good in some cases if it is > true, but to ignore the positive