Subject: [manet] News

From: Justin Dean <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 16:36:06 -0500

The working group chairs (Stan and Justin) and the AD (Alvaro) just
concluded a conference call.  There are some significant developments which
were decided during the talk:

1.  There will be NO MANET meeting in Buenos Aries.  Informal meetings, as
always within the IETF would continue as normal.  The reason for not having
a meeting, apparent lack of progress on DLEP and AODVv2.

2.  A new version of DLEP was published last night and will be last called
shortly so start your reading/reviews now.

3.  AODVv2: A new version of AODVv2 has been released, but hasn't had much
official on-list feedback regarding the changes and or remaining issues.
I've tasked myself to doing a thorough review, to get a better
understanding of were things stand (with regard to appropriateness of a
last call.)  If a last call is not reasonable within a very short timeframe
(within 3 weeks) with rough consensus of the working group, it will be
abandoned.
  3b. I've asked the authors to be more active on the list so that the
progress and effort they have been making is apparent to everyone.  I
believe they have taken my suggestion to heart. We as a working group also
have a responsibility to be constructive in our feedback.

4.  A recharter will happen before the next MANET meeting but that
discussion will be postponed until both DLEP and AODVv2 have been dealt
with.

Justin Dean

---

From: Abdussalam Baryun <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2016 20:52:35 +0200

> a meeting, apparent lack of progress on DLEP and AODVv2.

I am sorry to add that I think the no progress is because the WG chairs are
busy or not active on the list. For examples when I go to other WGs I see
that the Chair is always moving the ideas and following up with
drafts/authors/responses/issues per week/day.  I am sorry to see that this
WG-list is not having much push from the chair ( or even the AD). I think
solving the no progress will need another decision, I suggest that the WG
chairs should get an addition new chair that follows up only with those
both drafts.

> (within 3 weeks) with rough consensus of the working group, it will be

I don't agree until management defines the problem/issue, also your
decision is not understood is it based on procedure or on other
known-reason. Please respond/help. I think the problem is a management
problem and hope that IETF looks into such problem so that it does not
appear again.

> have a responsibility to be constructive in our feedback.

I agree.

> discussion will be postponed until both DLEP and AODVv2 have been dealt

I agree that issuing many new drafts can slow progress. I asked (before
many months) the WG that we need to focus on these two drafts, before
issuing new wg drafts or other issues. Yes I think if we just focus on
these two we will have alot of work and we can finish quickly, then we get
progress for WG.

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