IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: discussion on fast notification work

John E Drake <jdrake@juniper.net> Wed, 06 July 2011 21:57 UTC

Return-Path: <jdrake@juniper.net>
X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F1F821F8A97 for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Jul 2011 14:57:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.696
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.696 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.903, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id izpUVt94XYb9 for <rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 6 Jul 2011 14:57:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from exprod7og105.obsmtp.com (exprod7og105.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.163]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 880AA21F8A94 for <rtgwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 6 Jul 2011 14:57:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from P-EMHUB03-HQ.jnpr.net ([66.129.224.36]) (using TLSv1) by exprod7ob105.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP ID DSNKThTaPYt4l+I5nzrol+pd3O6kKvQ/wtfC@postini.com; Wed, 06 Jul 2011 14:57:18 PDT
Received: from EMBX01-HQ.jnpr.net ([fe80::c821:7c81:f21f:8bc7]) by P-EMHUB03-HQ.jnpr.net ([::1]) with mapi; Wed, 6 Jul 2011 14:53:44 -0700
From: John E Drake <jdrake@juniper.net>
To: Alia Atlas <akatlas@gmail.com>, "rtgwg@ietf.org" <rtgwg@ietf.org>
Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2011 14:53:42 -0700
Subject: RE: discussion on fast notification work
Thread-Topic: discussion on fast notification work
Thread-Index: Acw8H0n6G1a4V8GGRZmQnro7jTwVSgAB7jCQ
Message-ID: <5E893DB832F57341992548CDBB333163A0A8EEF877@EMBX01-HQ.jnpr.net>
References: <CAG4d1rfNthpfrHDzPASL5UVgP8ixXCDQY4KZSerRqx9YUriOpA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAG4d1rfNthpfrHDzPASL5UVgP8ixXCDQY4KZSerRqx9YUriOpA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Routing Area Working Group <rtgwg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtgwg>
List-Post: <mailto:rtgwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg>, <mailto:rtgwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2011 21:57:19 -0000

Alia,

Is it okay for me to say that I think that this is a really bad idea and that I was glad that interest in it had waned?

Thanks,

John

Sent from my iPhone


> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of Alia Atlas
> Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 1:57 PM
> To: rtgwg@ietf.org
> Subject: discussion on fast notification work
> 
> The last 2 IETFs, we have had discussions about the idea of fast
> notification, as described in
> draft-lu-fast-notification-framework, draft-lu-fn-transport-00, and
> draft-csaszar-ipfrr-fn-00.
> 
> Since then, I have not seen substantial discussion or interest on the
> mailing list.  If you are
> interested in this work, have questions about it, or would like to see
> RTGWG continue to discuss it,
> please send email to this mailing list.  I'd like to see this
> conversation happening here before IETF.
> 
> Thanks,
> Alia
> _______________________________________________
> rtgwg mailing list
> rtgwg@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email