Re: [manet] Progress...

[Stan Ratliff <[e-mail]>]

BTW, I'm fine with starting a discussion with the Security Considerations.
Probably the best place to start is for me to post the current text in the
Security Considerations - that may take me a short while. But I'll get it
out, and we can collectively look at it.

Regards,
Stan


On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:18 AM, Lou Berger <[e-mail]> wrote:

> agreed.  I should have said "closing out *major* open issues"...
>
> Lou
> On 1/18/2016 10:13 AM, Dearlove, Christopher (UK) wrote:
>
> Perhaps an intermediate (for the list). Major issues each with their own
> thread. For example security, the (still open?) question about extensions
> etc. The minor issues (e.g. introducing a name for a variable) collected.
> If a minor issue blows up into a major one, separate it out.
>
>
>
> *-- *
>
>
>
>
> *Christopher Dearlove Senior Principal Engineer BAE Systems Applied
> Intelligence Laboratories *
> *__________________________________________________________________________
> *
> *T*:  [phone]  |  *E: *[e-mail]
>
> BAE Systems Applied Intelligence, Chelmsford Technology Park, Great
> Baddow, Chelmsford, Essex CM2 8HN.
> www.baesystems.com/ai
>
> BAE Systems Applied Intelligence Limited
> Registered in England & Wales No: 01337451
>
> Registered Office: Surrey Research Park, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 7YP
>
>
>
> *From:* Stan Ratliff [mailto:[e-mail] <[e-mail]>]
>
> *Sent:* 18 January 2016 15:08
> *To:* Lou Berger
> *Cc:* Ratliff, Stanley; Justin Dean; Dearlove, Christopher (UK);
> [e-mail]
> *Subject:* Re: [manet] Progress...
>
>
>
>
>
> **** WARNING ****
>
> *This message originates from outside our organisation, either from an
> external partner or the internet.*
>
> * Consider carefully whether you should click on any links, open any
> attachments or reply. For information regarding **Red Flags** that you
> can look out for in emails you receive, click here
> <http://intranet.ent.baesystems.com/howwework/security/spotlights/Documents/Red%20Flags.pdf>.*
> * If you feel the email is suspicious, please follow this process
> <http://intranet.ent.baesystems.com/howwework/security/spotlights/Documents/Dealing%20With%20Suspicious%20Emails.pdf>.*
>
> 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
>
> ********************************************************************
> This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended
> recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
> recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender.
> You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or
> distribute its contents to any other person.
> ********************************************************************
>
>
>