Re: [Rtg-open-source] rtg-open-source list and meeting at IETF 98

"Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <> Wed, 08 February 2017 19:32 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31F40129418 for <>; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 11:32:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.522
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.522 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FRIgW-lGoenK for <>; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 11:32:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 22220129FCC for <>; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 11:32:38 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=7416; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1486582358; x=1487791958; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:references:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=7UtX90tD/YxiDiA0bleXlCxw0BABv+p4eHpnnCPHjcM=; b=FKGTbarq8vKPASFeVt3SlE5tNngNvrzwAnzdxTL42Z0QemE8Nc6VJRER uxdLGITeMboqk7P2xK96sLWUqBAxVJKun5v9L8wFk11hI6HgF2ZYWQx+L 4+fY2bvf0GZ2XZDwF1iRMq6LQBPYoYa6rO+GSmq1lr55LRwsvuXLcTtPa 4=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.35,348,1484006400"; d="scan'208,217";a="383007261"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 08 Feb 2017 19:32:37 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v18JWbGl026183 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 8 Feb 2017 19:32:37 GMT
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1210.3; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 13:32:36 -0600
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 15.00.1210.000; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 13:32:36 -0600
From: "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <>
To: Alia Atlas <>, "" <>
Thread-Topic: [Rtg-open-source] rtg-open-source list and meeting at IETF 98
Thread-Index: AQHSfl8UkBUd9RXhA0WsBAv6ByFLWaFfZWQA
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 2017 19:32:36 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/f.1e.0.170107
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_0EB481B0E8E949B3AA95E97C669A7A23ciscocom_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Rtg-open-source] rtg-open-source list and meeting at IETF 98
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion and collaboration for Open Source efforts related to the Routing Area <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2017 19:32:44 -0000

Hi Alia,

I think an in person meeting would be useful and will prioritize it in my schedule if it occurs.
I found our brief meeting at IETF 97 informative and a good use of time.


From: Rtg-open-source <> on behalf of Alia Atlas <>
Date: Friday, February 3, 2017 at 12:49 PM
To: "" <>
Subject: [Rtg-open-source] rtg-open-source list and meeting at IETF 98

There hasn't been substantial discussion or coordination on the rtg-opens-source mailing list.  We did meet in person at IETF 97 and there was a suggestion for having a more general meeting (non-WG forming BoF type thing) that would discuss different open source projects, their maturity, and deployed state and use.  The BOF deadline is February 10 and I haven't heard of motion on this idea yet.

Is it useful to consider meeting in person again at IETF 98?  Is it sufficient to simply have this mailing list for discussion and coordination when necessary?

Without enthusiasm expressed here, I'm not anticipating having a meeting at IETF 98.