Re: Discussions in IETF WGs

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Abdussalam,
At 03:12 09-06-2012, Abdussalam Baryun wrote:
For example, in one of the WG discussion on list, two members of WG
have referenced a history-discussion and informed me to read them
regarding some subject, I did do that but was *lost in translation*. I
now think that the memebrs' advise was to a wrong direction. We SHOULD
NOT refer in our current discussions to any other
history-subjected-discussions (thoes discussion had no approve by WG
consensus nor IESG review) in any WGs.  Also referring to old
discussions in the list result to waste time and MAY make current
arguments long (i.e. long means more than 5 working days), or even
makes the current argument unproductive.Old-discussions MAY be
misleading/incorrect/invalid, even if they are helpful to gain some
knowledge.

If someone is not aware of the old discussions about an issue it can be a problem. The issue may have to be discussed again when there isn't any new input available.

Is the above related to discussions in the MANET WG?

Regards,
-sm


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]