Re: [dtn-interest] DTNWG proposal is a terribly bad idea

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

 



+1 Vint

Best wishes
نبيل بنعمرو
Nabil Benamar
Moulay Ismail University.
Meknes. Morocco
nabilbenamar.com


On Sat, Jul 19, 2014 at 12:29 PM, Vint Cerf <vint@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
ok, you don't need to participate in the WG if it is formed, Lloyd.

vint



On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 11:28 PM, <l.wood@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I'm not going to be attending the DTNWG BOF remotely, as it's
at 2am my local time - but I'd just like to point out, as I said in

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dtn/current/msg00026.html
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dtn/current/msg00054.html

that I think that having an IETF workgroup push the technically
flawed Bundle Protocol through on standards track, after years
of poor development and unfixed problems across two IRTF research
groups, is a really terribly bad idea that does not benefit the IETF
community, and does not benefit work on delay-tolerant networking
or ad-hoc networking in general.

So, I am not in favour of the proposed DTNWG being formed.

Enjoy Toronto.

Lloyd Wood
http://sat-net.com/L.Wood/dtn
_______________________________________________
dtn-interest mailing list
dtn-interest@xxxxxxxx
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-interest


_______________________________________________
dtn-interest mailing list
dtn-interest@xxxxxxxx
https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn-interest



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