Hi Eric, Yes, the proposal kept changing to take the best form, the two ID names idea was made to help to reach the final stage of being a standard.
Lets make the problem clear which may help us, the concept is that one size doesn’t fits all, so consensus with this low percentage is critical alarm, can’t fight for my idea in all directions, there are many haters from the community now to this division problem, they wanna do as much support as they can but not to be a factor in the solution, they are affected as all but not their problem. Best regards, Khaled Omar Get Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef> ________________________________ From: Eric Vyncke (evyncke) <evyn...@cisco.com> Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2020 2:36:55 PM To: Joseph Touch <to...@strayalpha.com>; Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.o...@outlook.com> Cc: int-area <int-area@ietf.org>; IETF Discussion <i...@ietf.org> Subject: Re: IPv10 I-D Destiny. With my INT Area Director hat on: Thank you Joe for providing the pointer to the previous email exchange. Khaled, all efforts to improve the Internet are always welcome, but, as Joe, I would like to understand what has changed since 2017 ? IPv6, that solves the IPv4 issues, is being more and more deployed (actually doubled from January 2017 to August 2020 – even if not fast enough to my taste). Did you vastly change your proposal ? Best regards -éric From: ietf <ietf-boun...@ietf.org> on behalf of Joseph Touch <to...@strayalpha.com> Date: Wednesday, 12 August 2020 at 21:36 To: Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.o...@outlook.com> Cc: int-area <int-area@ietf.org>, IETF Discussion <i...@ietf.org> Subject: Re: IPv10 I-D Destiny. On Aug 11, 2020, at 9:27 PM, Khaled Omar <eng.khaled.o...@outlook.com<mailto:eng.khaled.o...@outlook.com>> wrote: It’s really weird to hear the silence for my e-mails at the IETf main list,... You were told in 2017 that this was not appropriate for this list and to take this topic to INTAREA. You did and it was discussed and rejected for further discussion here: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/int-area/cYhjioyneuGF-Y0LEHUiO_p91jo/ If you want further consideration: a) *significantly* update your proposal, addressing the feedback you received 3 years ago b) post a request to evaluate that new proposal to INTAREA Simply re-posting and re-asking a question isn’t going to change the answer. PS - the link below is to -06; the most recent (and still expired) is -11. Joe From: ietf <ietf-boun...@ietf.org<mailto:ietf-boun...@ietf.org>> On Behalf Of Khaled Omar Sent: Wednesday, August 12, 2020 3:48 AM To: IETF Discussion <i...@ietf.org<mailto:i...@ietf.org>> Subject: IPv10 I-D Destiny. .... Here is the linky to the IPv10 I-D: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-omar-ipv10-06 THANK YOU, Khaled Omar
_______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list Int-area@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
