On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 6:38 PM, Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 12:50 AM, Alia Atlas <akatlas@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:I've been talking about it since July 2017 - when we merged the mailing lists.I have been in OSPF WG before that date but did not see any discussion about closing this WG, please refer me to any thread in the list (I just checked now but not finding any subject related to closing down).The last ospf & isis WGs were merged.IMO, merging does not mean closing, even the charter did not mention closing,
Yes - merging does mean closing - since neither existing working group would have been the right one
for the combined work. The work from ospf and isis moved to lsr; the LSR WG charter
clearly stated that it would take all active WG drafts from ospf & isis (thread started on Jan 23).
The discussion about merging OSPF and ISIS into a single WG started with an email at
on July 19.
The charter for LSR went out for review - and yours was the only question.There has been ample time for discussion.I did not get a discussion after the LC-review,
Your email on Feb 16 expressed confusion on how the merged WG would work.
The charter clearly said - and this has happened -
"The LSR Working Group was formed by merging the isis and ospf WGs and
assigning all their existing adopted work at the time of chartering to LSR."
In my email on July 19, I explained the reasons I saw for merging OSPF and ISIS.
It is unfortunate that you were confused.
Regards,
Alia
ABOn Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 5:31 PM, Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:I did not expect this is the way WG closes in IETF, is there a clear procedure or best ways of closing WGs?IMO, it is not a right way to close.ABOn Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 12:16 AM, <ospf-owner@xxxxxxxx> wrote:The OSPF WG has closed. Relevant discussions are continuing in the
Link-State Routing (LSR) WG. Please resend your message to
lsr@xxxxxxxx.my subject is about closing OSPF not LSR,
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Abdussalam Baryun <abdussalambaryun@xxxxxxxxx>
To: Alia Atlas <akatlas@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: OSPF List <ospf@xxxxxxxx>
Bcc:
Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2018 00:16:12 +0200
Subject: Re: [OSPF] OSPF WG Closing (work to LSR)I don't think it should be closed,ABOn Thu, Mar 1, 2018 at 8:53 PM, Alia Atlas <akatlas@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:As I expect you have seen, the charter for the Link-State Routing (lsr) WG has been approved and the lsr WG now exists.All subscribers to the ospf mailing list have been subscribed to the lsr mailing list.OSPF WG drafts that are already in the RFC Editor's queue will remain as beingpublished from the OSPF WG - but follow-up will be to the lsr mailing list.All OSPF WG drafts have been migrated to the lsr WG and appear on the data-tracker.In the LSR datatracker (on the About tab under Additional Links), there are links to boththe OSPF and ISIS datatracker, so that published RFCs and individual drafts can easily be located.I would like to again thank Abhay Roy for his many years of service as OSPF WG Chair.Regards,Alia
_______________________________________________
OSPF mailing list
OSPF@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ospf
