[manet] Re: I-D Action: draft-templin-6man-mla-32.txt

Speaking entirely personally.

Old participants contributed everything this WG has done (with the exception of some of the most recent DLEP work).. It’s entirely unfair to characterise people who have made contributions then moved on as not cooperative. Nor is it reasonable to say they did not complete the work. Many of them completed the work they set out to achieve. That there is still work needed is the story of life, there is always more work needed. If I might speak for OLSRv2 (which actually delivered what was promised, a routing protocol) it contains the features needed for Internetworking. It is clearly outside its scope how the required gateway information that it needs is determined. Is that a failure of the OLSRv2 authors to move on and do more work on a new protocol? No, they didn’t ever promise to do that. If it’s needed, it’s up to those with a need to step up. (As Fred is trying to do, though I’ve not read his drafts properly to comment on them.) There have been a couple of failures - though I’m not going to re-open old wounds to describe them. But the bigger failure is not enough contributors, not failure by those who did contribute. Not discussion, but authorship, implementation, those things.

> On 19 Mar 2026, at 06:44, Abdussalam Baryun <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Mar 17, 2026 at 11:44 AM Christopher Dearlove <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> Old participants have moved on.
> 
> Yes that is good, so at least we know, and we can make new updates,
>  
>> If they were really interested they’d make occasional appearances (such as I do). If they are lurking, and see a reason to chip in, great. But you can’t rely on anything from them - and most especially you can’t require anything from them.
> 
> I just wanted to make sure that we are referencing any old concerns, however, the old participants did not complete the work needed to be done,
>  
>> People are here either because they are interested, and interests move on (often when they get their PhD) or it’s their job, and employers move on too (mine did).
> 
> I agree but IMHO also the participants interested need to be cooperative, and IMHO  our old participants in past that left now they were not cooperative enough to make progress, so my question was to make sure we close their old discussions that failed to get to solutions.
> 
> I agree we need to go on and we need to support this draft and discuss the important issues that was not solved in the past.
> 
> best regards
> AB

_______________________________________________
manet mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]