Re: [manet] Progress...

["Dearlove, Christopher (UK)" <[e-mail]>]

I’ve noticed that (and this is in part my fault) that under this thread there are comments about DLEP and AODVv2, but not always clear without following the chain which applies to which.

So I think Lou’s suggestion that has converged on discuss major issues separately, minor can be together, has been about DLEP. The not-ideal mix of on- and off-list discussion and reasons to discuss on-list is about AODVv2.

(I think it isn’t clear because I read one of my own comments and it wasn’t immediately obvious which it was talking about.)

--
Christopher Dearlove
Senior Principal Engineer
BAE Systems Applied Intelligence Laboratories
__________________________________________________________________________

T:  [phone]  |  E: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

BAE Systems Applied Intelligence, Chelmsford Technology Park, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, Essex CM2 8HN.
www.baesystems.com/ai<http://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: manet [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Stan Ratliff
Sent: 18 January 2016 15:23
To: Lou Berger
Cc: 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>.
*** WARNING ***
EXTERNAL EMAIL -- This message originates from outside our organization.

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]<mailto:[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]<tel:%2B44%20%280%291245%20242194>  |  E: [e-mail]<mailto:[e-mail]>

BAE Systems Applied Intelligence, Chelmsford Technology Park, Great Baddow, Chelmsford, Essex CM2 8HN.
www.baesystems.com/ai<http://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]]
Sent: 18 January 2016 15:08
To: Lou Berger
Cc: Ratliff, Stanley; Justin Dean; Dearlove, Christopher (UK); [e-mail]<mailto:[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.
********************************************************************