Re: Future of the GELS mailing list

[Eric W Gray <ewgray2k@netscape.net>]

Andy,

    Because this is an over-simplification, I have to disagree.

    We need somewhere in which to talk about work - even if it is being done
somewhere else - partly because we are otherwise asking everyone to join an
IEEE mailing list (for example) and partly because we would otherwise gum up
the CCAMP mailing list with that discussion (as we are now doing).

--
Eric

Andrew G. Malis wrote:

Dimitri,

 

Since we've agreed that the data plane elements are out of the IETF's charter, this discussion shouldn't occur on an IETF-sponsored list (such as gels@rtg.ietf.org).  This should happen either on an IEEE-associated list, or a private list not associated with the IETF.

 

Thanks,

Andy

 

On 7/11/06, Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be <Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be > wrote:

adrian & don

> We have agreed we don't define the IEEE data planes in the IETF.

this is agreed before starting GELS (from last year)

the point is that we need a place to discuss data plane elements that are
in scope of the control plane

thanks,
- dimitri.





"Adrian Farrel" < adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Sent by: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org
11/07/2006 15:35
Please respond to "Adrian Farrel"

       To:     "Don Fedyk" < dwfedyk@nortel.com>, Dimitri
PAPADIMITRIOU/BE/ALCATEL@ALCATEL
       cc:     <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>, < gels@rtg.ietf.org>
       Subject:        Re: Future of the GELS mailing list


> We have agreed we don't define the IEEE data planes in
> the IETF.  But we will need a venue to discuss the profile
> of the data plane(s).  A separate list may be useful.

That was also my thinking, and I would prefer *that* discussion to not
happen on the CCAMP list.

Adrian





_______________________________________________
gels mailing list
gels@rtg.ietf.org
https://rtg.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gels