Subject: [manet] DYMO Milestone date

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 14:08:26 +0100

Dear MANET Chairs,

Please note that I already requested on the MANET-list to provide our
WG draft dymo a milestone date, but still you did n't update or even
respond. Please note that this will be my last reminder, and I will
send a complain as procedure satates if you continue to ignore such
input.

Best Regards
Abdussalam Baryun

---

From: "Adrian Farrel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 14:28:47 -0000

Hey Abdussalam,

You are right that a milestone will be needed.

But do you think that it might be a good idea to wait for the resolution of the
current WG discussion about AODVv2 before determining a milestone. For example,
if option 3 is selected, we clearly don't need a milestone. And the choice of
starting point is also going to affect the delivery.

I see no value in setting an artificial project management deadline, and I see
no value in setting it without being able to do the necessary planning tasks.

Adrian

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Abdussalam Baryun [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: 04 November 2012 13:08.
> To: [email-masked]; Stan Ratliff
> Cc: manet; adrian
> Subject: DYMO Milestone date
> 
> Dear MANET Chairs,
>

---

From: Daniel He <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 4 Nov 2012 15:01:16 +0000

> Absolutely true! we are not doing EU projects.

Dan

> _______________________________________________
> manet mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/manet
>

-- 
Dan He
---------------------
Tel: +44-788-686-3428

---

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2012 13:11:05 +0100

Hi Adrian,

I just needed a respond from management of the WG relating to the our
draft. If managers don't respond to some inputs, then I think there is
no value at all in participating. I think you agree with my concerns.
Thanks for your respond,

AB