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