[Forces-protocol] Re: 01-5

Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@znyx.com> Sun, 24 October 2004 17:46 UTC

Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA16165 for <forces-protocol-web-archive@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 13:46:37 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CLmfG-0001rK-1a for forces-protocol-web-archive@ietf.org; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 14:00:22 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CLmQ2-0003XZ-D2; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 13:44:38 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CLmOE-0003N9-AV for forces-protocol@megatron.ietf.org; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 13:42:46 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA15911 for <forces-protocol@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 13:42:45 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from znx208-2-156-007.znyx.com ([208.2.156.7] helo=lotus.znyx.com) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CLmbV-0001mo-8d for forces-protocol@ietf.org; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 13:56:30 -0400
Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([208.2.156.2]) by lotus.znyx.com (Lotus Domino Release 5.0.11) with ESMTP id 2004102410451276:39790 ; Sun, 24 Oct 2004 10:45:12 -0700
From: Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@znyx.com>
To: avri@psg.com
In-Reply-To: <0F5DC2E6-25DB-11D9-9DB1-000393CC2112@psg.com>
References: <468F3FDA28AA87429AD807992E22D07E02579210@orsmsx408> <1E526654-24BF-11D9-9DB1-000393CC2112@psg.com> <417A23E6.7010504@zurich.ibm.com> <005b01c4b907$242b1790$020aa8c0@wwm1> <417AA8B6.1040601@zurich.ibm.com> <1098558745.1097.42.camel@jzny.localdomain> <CE5A3946-252D-11D9-9DB1-000393CC2112@psg.com> <128f01c4b9c0$fe9df280$845c21d2@Necom.hzic.edu.cn> <0F5DC2E6-25DB-11D9-9DB1-000393CC2112@psg.com>
Organization: ZNYX Networks
Message-Id: <1098639759.1096.258.camel@jzny.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.2
Date: 24 Oct 2004 13:42:40 -0400
X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on Lotus/Znyx(Release 5.0.11 |July 24, 2002) at 10/24/2004 10:45:13 AM, Serialize by Router on Lotus/Znyx(Release 5.0.11 |July 24, 2002) at 10/24/2004 10:45:15 AM, Serialize complete at 10/24/2004 10:45:15 AM
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: d185fa790257f526fedfd5d01ed9c976
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "Khosravi, Hormuzd M" <hormuzd.m.khosravi@intel.com>, ram.gopal@nokia.com, "Wang, Weiming" <wmwang@mail.hzic.edu.cn>, forces-protocol@ietf.org, Ligang Dong <donglg@mail.hzic.edu.cn>, Robert Haas <rha@zurich.ibm.com>
Subject: [Forces-protocol] Re: 01-5
X-BeenThere: forces-protocol@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: hadi@znyx.com
List-Id: forces-protocol <forces-protocol.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/forces-protocol>, <mailto:forces-protocol-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/forces-protocol>
List-Post: <mailto:forces-protocol@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:forces-protocol-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/forces-protocol>, <mailto:forces-protocol-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: forces-protocol-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: forces-protocol-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: c3a18ef96977fc9bcc21a621cbf1174b
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Avri,

On Sun, 2004-10-24 at 12:37, avri@psg.com wrote:

> 
> As i said in an earlier note, i can always put things back in.  I don't 
> actually remove these things on the first pass, I just comment them out 
> in the xml files.  and if someone complains, I can uncomment them.  
> Basically I am trying to find the rough consensus point - though I 
> freely acknowledge that I can only recommend where i think that point 
> is. At this point any issue that can't be resolved needs to go to the 
> WG and the chairs for determination of the rough consensus.  Frankly I 
> thought we had rough consensus on the issue.  It certainly seemed to be 
> reflected in the decisions being made on the text.
> 

Just keep up the good work.
I think people may be confused if you are actually following the
discussion (since you are unusually quiet) hence the comments you may
have seen. 
But now that we know you are - you should be allowed to exercise your
editorial powers on things IMO. What you are doing
in keeping the old text around when the person who made the changes
to that section hasnt responded is a very good idea.

> At this point there are only 20 hours left before I need to submit the 
> draft.  I have been reading the list rather faithfully and trying to 
> understand which issues have been resolved and which have not.  I 
> honestly thought this debate had been resolved.  If I make a mistake, 
> and i acknowledge that i do make mistakes i will roll back the text. 
> And since this is not the final version, anything can be changed - 
> especially if/when we start to get some WG community feedback.
> 

The path issue has been resolved; i think we may be just talking past
each other. The issue thats still open is the data packing.

> Note: if, my editorial judgments are disturbing, and I try to make as 
> few as I think this group can bear, I will pass on the document to 
> someone else. Having said that, I think it is time to start making 
> decisions and bringing them to the WG who are, in point of fact, the 
> owners of the draft.
> 

The WG should see the draft after we are done i think. I wouldnt say we
are.

> Anyhow, over the next 20 hours I will try to remain available as much 
> as possible to get a draft out that meets this team's rough consensus.
> 

Great.

> Incidentally I have now uncommented that note - i.e. it will show up 
> again in 01-7 unless it gets resolved between then and now.
> 
> Another point.  I have not managed to do the work necessary to activate 
> the issues database, but will try to do so before the IETF.  In my 
> opinion, it is time to start moving these disagreements from the text 
> into an issues database in an effort to drive this document to 
> completion - our milestone is March 05 - only 5 months away at this 
> point.
> 

This would be nice.

> also, how many of the team will be at the meeting.  We really should 
> have a face to face session to resolve as many issues as possible.  I 
> will be arriving in DC Saturday morning (for the HIP RG  seminar) and 
> will remain in town until the following Saturday morning
> 

I plan to be there.

cheers,
jamal


> a.
> 


_______________________________________________
Forces-protocol mailing list
Forces-protocol@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/forces-protocol