Re: [dtn] proposed DTN workgroup - what is process being followed?

William Ivancic <ivancic@syzygyengineering.com> Wed, 22 October 2014 01:47 UTC

Return-Path: <ivancic@syzygyengineering.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEFB11A8999 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Oct 2014 18:47:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=unavailable
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cYLPvVi6vWhu for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Oct 2014 18:47:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nm12.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com (nm12.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com [98.138.90.75]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B01DC1A89A2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Oct 2014 18:47:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [98.138.100.116] by nm12.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 22 Oct 2014 01:47:33 -0000
Received: from [98.138.89.248] by tm107.bullet.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 22 Oct 2014 01:47:33 -0000
Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp1040.mail.ne1.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 22 Oct 2014 01:47:33 -0000
X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3
X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 816526.34745.bm@omp1040.mail.ne1.yahoo.com
Received: (qmail 30193 invoked by uid 60001); 22 Oct 2014 01:47:33 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1413942453; bh=R7xyktSKD8+vJUhfd15aXDF3sOknl5vIHDuNfcISPaA=; h=References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=f+Njt0JbIOu3ivwUNczsiXF03lLfTe9kfmZ0Ujqw6gDcA8YbjjfuKHXvnaQ0EaYNBhkSFj75u8jurBCfdYrC6EijSGvmDM83Wpa04ewkZAkD+Ia6ENSwmXW12IdkPmyZEtY1eb0P2UL1FzQRJrU40VvOPtiA9fGEwHwTA3+aD3Y=
X-YMail-OSG: z6k_NO8VM1kFbiNqzWL.2mVWO8kSHOLvj6UZv5PervXX7ik 4LysxxgwyLvg4yr.2FMkJy2Y4xtKKloj1f6CQV1ze0YT8Npttu3_w3scZt1C vrX0Qk.osMX7FE2qWxXajixX_CFl34B8fLBrT0WtWJ8msiyhTGx1.guDHXZo g6fxsFzHxJnVpqMXIsLs4nupaAyRgxKvMDSu5_rxxM7dhlLm1vBLiU9ZE7JZ 0dPWbweZqRI_Dhyozl.d7lQEoypUQVTkM72SDH_Kfatnkaer2CdALlH6fGN1 EV0cbTQIFykAa19YtbNroyOu7YjAWpXMVpbfwIvvjBsahdHFkFzWV0WEERww Rfc2pxJZY_F7HlbEpZhF7f6mEeOUKJMokUHfhCGUU0KFbK_MgY4ov6lhq6Wf Aff_qw4zJZlap3iDKnbql9GgMlwKaCkbGgzEu2BJpv8CSy.1M6z6FvVIv.ss zhXSmeUmLwqaCMTp01AGupnNZNuT0tm60wZSYPRicZaaT5CY_ADF_u_9U2hW .lVMH.7Ml.HrTmwTzQaZpQGwyTZmnoa6m0aRUaYaQ1y7JgxcAwQ--
Received: from [184.56.61.175] by web125101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 21 Oct 2014 18:47:33 PDT
X-Rocket-MIMEInfo: 002.001, CgpBcyBmYXIgYXMgbXkgY29tbWVudHMgcmVnYXJkaW5nIFVTIEFybXkgKHRoZXNlIGFyZSB0aGUgZ3V5cyBldmFsdWF0aW9uIERUTik6ICBIb3cgYWJvdXQgZGVkdWN0aXZlIHJlYXNvbmluZyByYXRoZXIgdGhhbmNpdGF0aW9uLiAgSWYgSSByZWNhbGwgY29ycmVjdGx5IHRoZXJlIGhhcyBiZWVuIGxpdHRsZSBpZiBhbnkgaW5wdXQgZnJvbSB0aGUgVVMgQXJteSBvciB0aG9zZSB3aG8gd29ya2VkIG9uIERUTiBmb3IgdGhlbSBzdWNoIGFzIHRoZSAgQkJOIGZvbGtzIGluIHRoZSBwYXN0IHllYXIgb3IgdHdvIG8BMAEBAQE-
X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.8.203.733
References: <1413638841.79127.YahooMailNeo@web28903.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> <1413642432.88432.YahooMailNeo@web28901.mail.ir2.yahoo.com> <544630B5.3080006@gmail.com> <1413905917.2651.YahooMailNeo@web125103.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1413935188.59957.YahooMailNeo@web125105.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <5446FE83.7090101@cs.tcd.ie>
Message-ID: <1413942453.59759.YahooMailNeo@web125101.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 18:47:33 -0700
From: William Ivancic <ivancic@syzygyengineering.com>
Subject: Re: [dtn] proposed DTN workgroup - what is process being followed?
To: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>, Martin Stiemerling <mls.ietf@gmail.com>, Lloyd Wood <lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk>, "iab@iab.org" <iab@iab.org>, "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>, "dtn@ietf.org" <dtn@ietf.org>, "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <5446FE83.7090101@cs.tcd.ie>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="1268171098-122622582-1413942453=:59759"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/_8L7ds2H1ij-0TCGsr1xPOoguX8
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 11:08:48 -0700
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: William Ivancic <ivancic@syzygyengineering.com>
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 01:47:45 -0000
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 01:47:45 -0000
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 01:47:45 -0000


As far as my comments regarding US Army (these are the guys evaluation DTN):  How about deductive reasoning rather thancitation.  If I recall correctly there has been little if any input from the US Army or those who worked on DTN for them such as the  BBN folks in the past year or two on any of the DTN list including this one.  Thus, my conclusion is that they do not appear to be  pushing for continued work on RFC5050.  

>From your input and others that worked the N4C project, I deduce the same.  There doesn't appear to be a push to continue work on RFC5050.  It is fine if it happens. Iindividuals have offered to help out within the bounds of their workloads, but they don't appear to be pushing for this.

This is my perspective, but it is not based on rumor, rather observation. Granted, they say appearances can be deceiving.  But then again, they may not be.



Will



________________________________
 From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
To: William Ivancic <ivancic@syzygyengineering.com>; Martin Stiemerling <mls.ietf@gmail.com>; Lloyd Wood <lloyd.wood@yahoo.co.uk>; "iab@iab.org" <iab@iab.org>; "iesg@ietf.org" <iesg@ietf.org>; "dtn@ietf.org" <dtn@ietf.org>; "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org> 
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2014 8:46 PM
Subject: Re: [dtn] proposed DTN workgroup - what is process being followed?
 


Hi Will,

On 22/10/14 00:46, William Ivancic wrote:
> Correction:
> 
> 
> Correction: forgot the NOT between 'do' and 'appear'.  Changes the
> meaning significantly.
> 
> 
> 
> So, the original proponents of DTN such as the US Army and those
> other than the Space Community such as the those working the N4C
> project do NOT appear to be pushing for continued work on RFC5050, I
> think, mainly due to difficulty in real world deployments.

Citation? I'm not aware of any. If there are no citations due
to a lack of public release then I'd be as critical of basing
a decision on that as I was about the lack of use-case detail
supplied by folks who do want the new WG. Decisions here ought
not be based on rumour which is what your statement about the
US army ends up as in the absence of citations or real details
I'm afraid.