RE: Closing the GELS Mailing List

["Zafar Ali \(zali\)" <zali@cisco.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org 
> [mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Don Fedyk
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 10:41 AM
> To: PAPADIMITRIOU Dimitri; Adrian Farrel; ccamp@ops.ietf.org; gels
> Cc: Ross Callon
> Subject: RE: Closing the GELS Mailing List
> 
> 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?

Is there a cost for discussing them at CCAMP? I prefer a central place
for all discussions.   

Thanks

Regards... Zafar 

> 
> 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
>