Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?
John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Thu, 21 December 2017 15:56 UTC
Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.com>
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 C26A61252BA; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 07:56:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.91
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.91 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 aj41ZemzIptj; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 07:56:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8AC3D124217; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 07:56:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [198.252.137.10] (helo=PSB) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.82 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1eS3Cz-000G6O-60; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 10:56:33 -0500
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 10:56:27 -0500
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.omar@outlook.com>
cc: ietf <ietf@ietf.org>, rtgwg <rtgwg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously?
Message-ID: <1F3AC01AA49DD3BE543CCB9E@PSB>
In-Reply-To: <CAKW6Ri4oBtE7CsBNuDkd=pCM-ztHfo5xdGNG300e=RiJ2fODOg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AM4PR0401MB2241817BD0EEEE79B32C8CD2BD0F0@AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com> <51b495e6-ee1d-4224-6c7c-dec0f8248cc9@cisco.com> <D6601576.27F3B%christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> <BBF5DDFE515C3946BC18D733B20DAD233AA98562@XMB122CNC.rim.net> <AM4PR0401MB22414952845433B8D59CCC90BD0C0@AM4PR0401MB2241.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com> <BBF5DDFE515C3946BC18D733B20DAD233AA98825@XMB122CNC.rim.net> <60324BD8-E91D-49C7-9AE6-C6E22C836AC8@fugue.com> <AM5P190MB0434A92C65FE8657EB533315AE0D0@AM5P190MB0434.EURP190.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <CAKW6Ri4oBtE7CsBNuDkd=pCM-ztHfo5xdGNG300e=RiJ2fODOg@mail.gmail.c om>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: 198.252.137.10
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: john-ietf@jck.com
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on bsa2.jck.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtgwg/HIA23vrsTH6h_vueSNYJPRbHqrQ>
X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 15:56:37 -0000
Folks, May I suggest that we wind this discussion thread down. Whether correct or not, analyses of Khaled's character are probably not helpful and repetitive versions of them are less so. The S/N ratio on the IETF list is never wonderful and this thread should not contribute to making it worse. At least IMO, Khaled has been given a number of quite constructive suggestions (both on-list and off) about how to proceed if he wants to do so. Almost all of them include focusing on a problem statement and/or a careful and reflect literature review and analysis, but, if he wants to make progress, he needs to understand the details of those suggestions. Let's give him time to do that and see what, in the form of a draft focused on those topics, he comes up with and, in the process, try to reserve judgment about intentions, quality of listening, etc. best, john
- When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Khaled Omar
- Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Stephane Bortzmeyer
- Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Khaled Omar
- Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Khaled Omar
- Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Ladislav Lhotka
- Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Robert Wilton
- Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Christer Holmberg
- Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Khaled Omar
- RE: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? UTTARO, JAMES
- Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Robert Wilton
- RE: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Khaled Omar
- RE: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Andrew Allen
- RE: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Khaled Omar
- RE: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Andrew Allen
- RE: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Khaled Omar
- Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Ted Lemon
- RE: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Khaled Omar
- Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Dick Franks
- Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Ted Lemon
- RE: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Khaled Omar
- Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? John C Klensin
- Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Christopher Morrow
- RE: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Khaled Omar
- Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Christopher Morrow
- RE: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Khaled Omar
- Re: When the IETF can discuss drafts seriously? Alexander Vainshtein