Whatever works.
One other point - FWIW, I think this proposed email to Alvaro is pointless. As
such, I note that any email you send does *not* reflect the totality of the
AODVv2 author team. In other words, you might want to note that I (for one, I'd
like to hear the opinions of the others on this list) am opposed to this
effort.
Stan
-----Original Message-----
From: aodvv2-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:aodvv2-discuss-
bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Charlie Perkins
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2015 1:18 PM
To: aodvv2-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [aodvv2-discuss] Re: Regarding the discussion about tagging every
address.
Hello Stan,
I'd like it better if we didn't have to be at odds here. I'll change "cave
in" to
"make a business decision".
To me it feels like caving in, so I expressed my feelings and you took it as
an
insult. Point noted!
Regarding whether we had the discussion ... we certainly did, and my email
from this morning was one attempt to summarize that discussion.
Regards,
Charlie P.
On 6/9/2015 10:09 AM, Ratliff, Stanley wrote:
Nope. You don't get to hurl the accusation that "a majority of the AODVv2author team has decided to cave in", then come back and say "I would
certainly appreciate alternative wording." It doesn't work that way.
discussion. It was yesterday. The team expressed consensus - with 1
As for "a constructive discussion on these matters" - we *already had* that
member "in the rough". Issue decided. Time to change the text, and move
on. If you want to appeal, then have at it.
negative effect on getting to Last Call.
Stan
-----Original Message-----
From: aodvv2-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:aodvv2-discuss-
bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Charlie Perkins
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2015 1:00 PM
To: aodvv2-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [aodvv2-discuss] Re: Regarding the discussion about tagging
every address.
Hello Stan,
There is another possibility, which would have a lot better outcome.
Namely, please let me know where I have failed, which facts I
neglected in my cherry-picking, and why is it self-serving? By the
way, I am not making any money on this.
If my choice of wording is insulting, I would certainly appreciate
alternative wording.
I said basically these same things on the call yesterday, and tried
to get clarity that I did understand things correctly.
One other thing -- I am not shooting any you or anyone else here. If
you feel that I am doing that, then there's already something wrong
and we should fix it.
If anything, I am shooting at the incredible intransigence of Henning
et al., for reasons I have stated many times.
If you think I am myopic because I cannot see the bigger picture --
then let me hazard a guess that the bigger picture is actually
getting AODVv2 to Last Call. Well you can bet your last $0.35 that I
see that picture. It does not negate the observations I listed in my
email, and I somehow wonder why asking Alvaro's opinion would have a
matters.
Please do accept my invitation for a constructive discussion on these
change.
Regards,
Charlie P.
On 6/9/2015 9:23 AM, Ratliff, Stanley wrote:
Charlie,picked", and frankly, insulting.
Sigh. IMHO, your synopsis is myopic, somewhat self-serving and
"cherry-
That said, it *should* go without saying, but I'll say it anyway:to discuss with whomever you choose - Alvaro, Alia, Clausen.... heck,
You're free
even Jari and/or Abdussalam. Rock and roll. Take your best shot. Then
I'll take mine.
Stan
-----Original Message-----
From: aodvv2-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:aodvv2-discuss-
bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Charlie Perkins
Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2015 12:06 PM
To: aodvv2-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [aodvv2-discuss] Regarding the discussion about tagging
every address.
Hello folks,
These are my understandings:
- The discussion will take too long.
- The technical merit does not matter. Reviewing technical arguments
takes too long and would not change anyone's mind.
- Henning has said the same thing over and over again and will not
sender._____________________________________________________
- We cannot win this (regardless of technical merit).
So, on this basis, a majority of the AODVv2 author team has decided
to cave in.
If this is correct, I would like to inform Alvaro of the status of
this issue. I want to hear his opinion about this.
Regards,
Charlie P.
This electronic message and any files transmitted with it contains
information from iDirect, which may be privileged, proprietary
and/or confidential. It is intended solely for the use of the
individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the
original recipient or the person responsible for delivering the
email to the intended recipient, be advised that you have received
this email in error, and that any use, dissemination, forwarding,
printing, or copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you
received this email in error, please delete it and immediately notify the
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
This electronic message and any files transmitted with it contains
information from iDirect, which may be privileged, proprietary and/or
confidential. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or
entity to whom they are addressed. If you are not the original
recipient or the person responsible for delivering the email to the
intended recipient, be advised that you have received this email in
error, and that any use, dissemination, forwarding, printing, or
copying of this email is strictly prohibited. If you received this
email in error, please delete it and immediately notify the sender.
_____________________________________________________
