Thanks, Khaled Omar
From: Juan Carlos Zuniga [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, November 3, 2017 8:19 PM To: Khaled Omar Cc: int-area Subject: RE: [Int-area] Call for support: IPmix I-D (was IPv10) Hello, Indeed, the IntArea group has decided not to further discuss this draft. Regards, Juan Carlos From: Khaled Omar [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: November 3, 2017 9:17 AM To: Juan Carlos Zuniga <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: int-area <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [Int-area] Call for support: IPmix I-D (was IPv10) Hi, Does this means that IPv10 will not be presented at ietf 100? Best regards, Khaled Omar -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Int-area] Call for support: IPmix I-D (was IPv10) From: Juan Carlos Zuniga To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> CC: intarea-chairs Hello, The call for interest is now finished. We have not seen support to continue the discussion in the IntArea nor we have seen interest in creating an IETF mailing list. Hence, we respectfully request the authors to abandon any further discussion about the draft and the proposed solution from the IntArea mailing list. Best regards, Juan Carlos, Wassim & Suresh IntArea WG Chairs + AD From: Juan Carlos Zuniga Sent: October 4, 2017 11:08 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Cc: 'Wassim Haddad' <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Suresh Krishnan <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; intarea-chairs <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Call for support: IPmix I-D (was IPv10) Dear all, The IntArea mailing list has been repeatedly used to debate draft-omar-ipv10. So far, comments posted on the mailing list have consistently pointed towards a highly controversial topic on multiple levels. This includes the lack of a valid problem statement as well as a clear and persistent disconnect between the suggested proposal in draft-omar-ipv10 and the current market trends, deployments and available solutions. The IntArea AD and WG chairs are not satisfied with the nature and tone of the current exchange on the IntArea ML, nor enthusiastic about its potential prospect within the IntArea WG. However, the IntArea AD and WG chairs would like to encourage pursuing the discussion outside the IntArea WG if there is sufficient interest in the topic, e.g., on a separate mailing list. For this purpose, we would like to gauge the community interest to work on the problem statement and proposal described in draft-omar-IPv10 (possibly to be renamed IPmix). If you are interested in participating in the work mentioned above, please respond to this mail expressing your support by October 17, 2017. Regards, Juan Carlos, Wassim and Suresh IntArea WG Chairs + AD
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
