Re: [manet] Progress...

Stan Ratliff <ratliffstan@gmail.com> Mon, 18 January 2016 15:07 UTC

Return-Path: <ratliffstan@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: manet@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8D371B381F for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 07:07:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 pl_0j1xI1oFY for <manet@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 07:07:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ig0-x230.google.com (mail-ig0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F09A1B3820 for <manet@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 07:07:45 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ig0-x230.google.com with SMTP id z14so57173944igp.1 for <manet@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 07:07:45 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=SPmBz9BDHspL7RDZSoftGxS0ign+syNinKa/nxdGMDQ=; b=II9lVh4h7lq3M1OWCOzMB6c1CNmZdQfwqaqWj9HXv59thC5VzTCQ+D48gud85aTCLe N0Yi3RFB33KhrZJNfyDeq+HiB89jDqJx7/7Xa2oadx9Gh1UtSUufZRd8rZDmYrSqIcJN dpr2DegoyTSDbWFNIpb304phLSye0wWAyiABUkFYQ5iU8bDEiN2nCO4briMMlx/W42gf oAG6+kuADzvZR/GdoAjOqAjIz9BVsWIMFK5MhlhtlMXVvkBvlPAu8hTPnJLHyxea1hHW 6co1iV+fM+4OzVGjxnEKImrTp5OVj8CXCe3Sl+MdfXkMgKiVvEhbuRxn2B/knOjfZaI6 uTew==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=SPmBz9BDHspL7RDZSoftGxS0ign+syNinKa/nxdGMDQ=; b=V10Z5y0jAqSscJB0UzyX79yjYmZ9Keyv7xD6/y64f8SU8TMELlpl0sYKREsJB2UOl4 Rjm2DYq6hz8tR0FLb2RLu934EcAv4krsTUKWFsnE6vHSeP27hzNMG2jPFJfT8IW5bIVh r9n0wdllQVmGkA8XPif95tFaurEVw98Uq5TAj7JnLgbYtAbm5Av+yTblUSJu4S7t26mW jyfbF0R5/lh3Ccj78wDH4v+bH/dOozaPRxA+npOPNC7f1zBj7aMQnqH7bRKi/QHmhVCw TluQHhk/cDoRIceu1zqsQYNQuTbr1gDFXMp6FbibLkFXMHT3sT9lNw5HMczFWPjKW5kQ 2m1w==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YORN7XDHUsDStkm5C7jywbUxNIVLa1y6wtRToM6IXJ8KJ5aNPMy4eJIDGJ8FwkuDrKbFeh8Y27qF/J+5eg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.102.40 with SMTP id fl8mr11258612igb.85.1453129664667; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 07:07:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.79.96.1 with HTTP; Mon, 18 Jan 2016 07:07:44 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <569CFDF7.3020206@labn.net>
References: <CA+-pDCd_+hgQ8Ks+tT5FfCNAwwT-pCVhzC0VZpF8=uLJjkQ3hA@mail.gmail.com> <B31EEDDDB8ED7E4A93FDF12A4EECD30D8A6F22EB@GLKXM0002V.GREENLNK.net> <CA+-pDCcBDp5_UOj5+28SXGPyc_tUc1tqWFgLE32ukU2MUtUSsg@mail.gmail.com> <bfb25ff55acc48e1a24e9f3d106a9bd5@VAUSDITCHM3.idirect.net> <569CFDF7.3020206@labn.net>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 10:07:44 -0500
Message-ID: <CALtoyo=TMmQdxX+maOu62x8M-NbqB8gh-WJ-xcdYJRefyuE+Cg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Stan Ratliff <ratliffstan@gmail.com>
To: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="e89a8ffbad7d79a9fe05299d1df1"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/manet/5WZ-pM-JnCL-cHtUItz3x-8_cz0>
Cc: "manet@ietf.org" <manet@ietf.org>, "Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <chris.dearlove@baesystems.com>
Subject: Re: [manet] Progress...
X-BeenThere: manet@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mobile Ad-hoc Networks <manet.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/manet/>
List-Post: <mailto:manet@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet>, <mailto:manet-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2016 15:07:47 -0000

Lou,

    While admittedly a style preference, I think discussing each topic
> raised in a separate e-mail thread is a more conducive way of closing
> out open issues.  This way we can have focused discussions on each topic
> which hopefully yields in agreed upon text/changes per topic without
> having to solve / address all issues at once.  Some WGs even use trac to
> keep track of the open issues/discussion -- this is of course a WG chair
> / editor choice.
>
> >From the rest of your message, it sounds like the security
> considerations section could be topic one if you are amenable...
>
>
Sorry, I'm shifting over to the Gmail client - it just handles in-line
edits way better than Outlook, IMO... ;-)

Considering your above comments, I'll go investigate using trac - You're
right in that it's a style preference, but dealing with eleventy-seven
different email threads on DLEP over the last two versions just made my
head hurt. I understand what you're getting at, but as verbose as we *all*
tend to be, I believe that would cause an email storm of biblical
proportions...

Regards,
Stan