Re: [decade] WG Action: Conclusion of Decoupled Application Data Enroute (decade)

[Martin Stiemerling <[e-mail]>]

On 09/23/2012 04:47 AM, Rahman, Akbar wrote:
> For the record, here is the internal Word tracking document from June 2012 that the authors used to ensure that we addressed all the comments that we received from Carsten (Apps Area Reviewer) and Dave Harrington (Previous AD) on the Architecture I-D Rev. 04.  All these comments were incorporated into the subsequent versions of the Architecture I-D.  The authors had kept the chairs in the loop with the tracking document.
>
> This is part of the reason that the authors take offense to (and are puzzled by) the suggestion that we did not seriously address the comments that we got from various reviewers.

Where is the publicly accessible record of this?
Any email to the reviewers would good, just in order to see what 
comments you have addressed and how.

   Martin


>
>
> /Akbar
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Songhaibin [mailto:[e-mail]]
> Sent: Saturday, September 22, 2012 1:49 AM
> To: Martin Stiemerling; Rahman, Akbar
> Cc: [e-mail]; Konstantinos Pentikousis
> Subject: RE: [decade] WG Action: Conclusion of Decoupled Application Data Enroute (decade)
>
>> Talk to your chairs and consider that the requirements went from
>> publication requested (i.e., on the way to the IESG) back to the WG
>> (i.e., not on the way to the IESG).
>>
>> The same is true for the architecture draft.
>
> I was notified in June about the energy of the working group, but I was also surprised about the abrupt notification of the closure of the WG with the email from Martin on Monday, I saw a good list discussion, new I-D submission and was preparing for the Atlanta meeting when I received this notification. I also expressed my disagree to the comment of lack of technical substances. Before Martin became the AD for the DECADE WG, the architecture document was intended to remove a lot of technical details according to comments received, it's not a protocol draft.
>
> The extensive comments from Martin to these two IDs are mostly effective, but editorial. They could be addressed together with Kostas's comments in the next version . Again, I do not think these two documents are extremely bad and lack of technical substances.
>
> BR,
> -Haibin
>

-- 
[e-mail]

NEC Laboratories Europe - Network Research Division NEC Europe Limited
Registered Office: NEC House, 1 Victoria Road, London W3 6BL
Registered in England 283