Re: discussion on fast notification work

John,

Absolutely - I have not seen positive comments about this being a
problem that needs solving and have seen concerns about the security
implications.

I would prefer to have any discussion about it here so that we do not
spend valuable f2f time on this unless there is significant interest.

Alia

On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 5:53 PM, John E Drake <jdrake@juniper.net> wrote:
> 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
>