RE: Closing the GELS Mailing List

["Don Fedyk" <dwfedyk@nortel.com>]

Hi Adrian

Dmitri does have a point that if there is a topic that heads into the
"weeds" we could direct it to the GELS list explicitly.  

Is there a cost of keeping it open?

Regards,
Don  

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org [mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org] On
Behalf Of PAPADIMITRIOU Dimitri
Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 10:00 AM
To: Adrian Farrel; ccamp@ops.ietf.org; gels
Cc: Ross Callon
Subject: RE: Closing the GELS Mailing List

adrian,

you could leave the gels list for the list for the techno-specific
discussions and the ccamp list for the non-techno specific discussions

in any case, i believe the value of gels was so far to allow open
discussion on a topic that was on charter 

-> question: does proposed incorporation in charter (with milestones to
be better shaped inline with progress of IEEE) elevate any other need ?
complete decoupling of discussion has been shown to be difficult to be
realized in the past

thanks,
-dimitri.


 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org 
> [mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 11:27 AM
> To: ccamp@ops.ietf.org; gels
> Cc: Ross Callon
> Subject: Closing the GELS Mailing List
> 
> We propose to close the GELS mailing list.
> 
> Loa wrote...
> 
> > I tend to support this, but it begs two questions:
> >
> > - when will the charter update be ack'ed?
> 
> I don't know, and I can't promise that it will be ack'ed. but 
> the Routing ADs appear to support the change.
> 
> > - in the (unlikely) case where we don't get an ack for
> >  gels work the gels-list won't be needed anyhow, so;
> >  isn't the effect of the of your statement below that
> >  the gels-list is dead as of now? Especially since the
> >  on thing we are discussing at the moment is the charter
> >  update and this is on the ccamp list??
> 
> Absolutely.
> 
> I'll give you all a last chance to scream.
> 
> Thanks,
> Adrian