<= /DIV>

De : rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org=20 [mailto:rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org] De la part de Alvaro Retana=20 (aretana)
Envoy=E9 : mardi 2 avril 2013 19:18
=C0&nb= sp;:=20 rtgwg@ietf.org
Cc :=20 draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability@tools.ietf.org
Objet := =20 WG Adoption Requested for=20 draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-01

Hi!

The authors of 'Operational management of Loop Free Alternates' (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-01= )=20 have requested that rtgwg adopt their draft as a WG document.

Authors and Contributors: Please respond indicating whether or not y= ou=20 are aware of any relevant IPR. The draft will not progress until we= have=20 received a response from each author/contributor.

Please send any comments to the list by April 16, 2013.

Thanks!!

Alvaro.

________________________________________=
___________________________________________________________________________=
______

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confiden=
tielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu=
 ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages el=
ectroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
France Telecom - Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete al=
tere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged inf=
ormation that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and dele=
te this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, France Telecom - Orange is not liable for message=
s that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.

--_000_EEE55384044474429A926C625D0FCC810648050685PUEXCB2Fnante_-- From alessandro.capello@telecomitalia.it Wed Apr 3 05:15:48 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70D0A21F8A6D for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2013 05:15:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.719 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.719 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id uq-rcNtKuNmb for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2013 05:15:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from GRFEDG702BA020.telecomitalia.it (grfedg702ba020.telecomitalia.it [156.54.233.201]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A82B821F8A66 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2013 05:15:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from GRFHUB701BA020.griffon.local (10.188.101.111) by GRFEDG702BA020.telecomitalia.it (10.188.45.101) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.297.1; Wed, 3 Apr 2013 14:15:43 +0200 Received: from GRFMBX702BA020.griffon.local ([10.188.101.11]) by grfhub701ba020.griffon.local ([10.188.101.111]) with mapi; Wed, 3 Apr 2013 14:15:42 +0200 From: Capello Alessandro To: "rtgwg@ietf.org" Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 14:15:41 +0200 Subject: RE: WG Adoption Requested for draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-01 Thread-Topic: WG Adoption Requested for draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-01 Thread-Index: AQHOL8YCvDlawYGJxkepKR3LpfhOmJjEae4Q Message-ID: <36A93B31228D3B49B691AD31652BCAE9A5ADCC70A9@GRFMBX702BA020.griffon.local> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: acceptlanguage: en-US x-ti-disclaimer: Disclaimer1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2013 12:15:48 -0000 I support the adoption of the draft as a WG document. Regards, Alessandro ________________________________________ From: rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of A= lvaro Retana (aretana) Sent: marted=EC 2 aprile 2013 19.18 To: rtgwg@ietf.org Cc: draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability@tools.ietf.org Subject: WG Adoption Requested for draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-= 01 Hi! The authors of 'Operational management of Loop Free Alternates' (http://too= ls.ietf.org/html/draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-01) have requested= that rtgwg adopt their draft as a WG document. Authors and Contributors: Please respond indicating whether or not you are = aware of any relevant IPR. The draft will not progress until we have recei= ved a response from each author/contributor. Please send any comments to the list by April 16, 2013. Thanks!! Alvaro. Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle per= sone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dall= a conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abb= iate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di dar= ne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione= , Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged = information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, pri= nting or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended r= ecipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sen= der by return e-mail, Thanks. From rjs@rob.sh Wed Apr 3 14:48:49 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6855D21F9039 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2013 14:48:49 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gVxuBQt2lqyW for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2013 14:48:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cappuccino.rob.sh (cappuccino.rob.sh [IPv6:2001:b98:201:101::10:cafe]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C00D621F9033 for ; Wed, 3 Apr 2013 14:48:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [86.176.248.240] (helo=[192.168.1.67]) by cappuccino.rob.sh with esmtpa (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1UNVU2-0000ae-6H; Wed, 03 Apr 2013 22:44:42 +0100 Subject: Re: WG Adoption Requested for draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-01 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii From: Rob Shakir In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2013 22:48:46 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: Alvaro Retana (aretana) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283) Cc: "draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability@tools.ietf.org" , "rtgwg@ietf.org" X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2013 21:48:49 -0000 On 2 Apr 2013, at 18:17, Alvaro Retana (aretana) wrote: > Hi! >=20 > The authors of 'Operational management of Loop Free Alternates' = (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-01) = have requested that rtgwg adopt their draft as a WG document. Hi Alvaro, WG, This work reflects an important set of considerations around making LFA = deployable in real-world networks, and hence I support its adoption and = progression. Thanks, r.= From pierre.francois@imdea.org Fri Apr 5 03:12:34 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54D9821F9737 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 03:12:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.001, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VzVBa3cX512Q for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 03:12:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from estafeta.imdea.org (maquina46.madrimasd.org [193.145.15.46]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 827EC21F9733 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 03:12:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (estafeta22.imdea.org [172.17.99.146]) by estafeta22.imdea.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A043325DDCD; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 12:12:25 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: by antispam-antivirus system at imdea.org Received: from estafeta.imdea.org ([172.17.99.146]) by localhost (estafeta22.imdea.org [172.17.99.146]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tTPR5ytje4vZ; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 12:12:25 +0200 (CEST) Received: from dhcp-10-61-100-157.cisco.com (64-103-25-233.cisco.com [64.103.25.233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: pierre.francois) by estafeta22.imdea.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD9DF25DDCC; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 12:12:24 +0200 (CEST) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_938746DB-947E-4846-8B8F-649F0E6CC88D" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 $1499$) Subject: Re: WG Adoption Requested for draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-01 From: Pierre Francois In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 12:12:32 +0200 Message-Id: <41A54A7D-FFD7-462E-AA10-C562C41D0663@imdea.org> References: To: Alvaro Retana (aretana) X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) Cc: "draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability@tools.ietf.org" , "rtgwg@ietf.org" X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2013 10:12:34 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_938746DB-947E-4846-8B8F-649F0E6CC88D Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Alvaro,=20 Support. This draft is useful for those who want to control LFAs further = than enabling its default behaviour.=20 Pierre. (Note that I am listed in the contributors section at the end of = the draft.) On Apr 2, 2013, at 7:17 PM, Alvaro Retana (aretana) = wrote: > Hi! >=20 > The authors of 'Operational management of Loop Free Alternates' = (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-01) = have requested that rtgwg adopt their draft as a WG document. >=20 > Authors and Contributors: Please respond indicating whether or not you = are aware of any relevant IPR. The draft will not progress until we = have received a response from each author/contributor. >=20 > Please send any comments to the list by April 16, 2013. >=20 > Thanks!! >=20 > Alvaro. >=20 > _______________________________________________ > rtgwg mailing list > rtgwg@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg --Apple-Mail=_938746DB-947E-4846-8B8F-649F0E6CC88D Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii

Alvaro,

Support. This draft is useful for those who want to control LFAs further than enabling its default behaviour.

Pierre. (Note that I am listed in the contributors section at the end of the draft.)

On Apr 2, 2013, at 7:17 PM, Alvaro Retana (aretana) <aretana@cisco.com> wrote:

Hi!

The authors of 'Operational management of Loop Free Alternates' (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-01) have requested that rtgwg adopt their draft as a WG document.

Authors and Contributors: Please respond indicating whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. The draft will not progress until we have received a response from each author/contributor.

Please send any comments to the list by April 16, 2013.

Thanks!!

Alvaro.

_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
rtgwg@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

--Apple-Mail=_938746DB-947E-4846-8B8F-649F0E6CC88D-- From curtis@occnc.com Sun Apr 7 08:39:20 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 560BF21F8DA4 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 2013 08:39:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.495 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.495 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FwwPM-SUFurp for ; Sun, 7 Apr 2013 08:39:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gateway1.orleans.occnc.com (unknown [173.9.106.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C483321F8D40 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 2013 08:39:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from harbor1.ipv6.occnc.com (harbor1.ipv6.occnc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1545::2:819]) (authenticated bits=0) by gateway1.orleans.occnc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r37FbwRf078126; Sun, 7 Apr 2013 11:37:58 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from curtis@occnc.com) Message-Id: <201304071537.r37FbwRf078126@gateway1.orleans.occnc.com> To: "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" From: Curtis Villamizar Subject: Re: IETF 86 Minutes Posted In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 02 Apr 2013 17:03:16 -0000." Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2013 11:37:58 -0400 Cc: "rtgwg@ietf.org" X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: curtis@occnc.com List-Id: Routing Area Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2013 15:39:20 -0000 In message "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" writes: > Hi! > > The minutes have been posted here: http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/86/minu= > tes/minutes-86-rtgwg > > Many thanks to Sue Hares for being our note taker. > > Please send any corrections/additions. > > Thanks! > > Alvaro. WGLC is on CL requirements, not CL framework. The comment I made regarding air flow is that if you concentrate traffic onto one card that card runs hotter and the fan speed is determined by the amount of airflow needed to cool the hottest card. So air flow has to increase, not stay the same and therefore fan power will increase. Curtis From zhangmingui@huawei.com Mon Apr 8 02:50:08 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2B7521F92E8 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 02:50:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DaSn8Fkm1FDl for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 02:50:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B929F21F92C9 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 02:50:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml203-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id AQE06920; Mon, 08 Apr 2013 09:50:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from LHREML401-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.240) by lhreml203-edg.huawei.com (172.18.7.221) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 10:49:36 +0100 Received: from nkgeml405-hub.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.36) by lhreml401-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.240) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 10:50:03 +0100 Received: from NKGEML508-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.7.233]) by nkgeml405-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.36]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.007; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 17:49:58 +0800 From: Mingui Zhang To: "rtgwg@ietf.org" Subject: RE: IETF 86 Minutes Posted Thread-Topic: IETF 86 Minutes Posted Thread-Index: AQHOL8P4nn5qQeN2Y0aBSxnPPjgepJjMG5Kg Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 09:49:58 +0000 Message-ID: <4552F0907735844E9204A62BBDD325E732B0ABDD@nkgeml508-mbx.china.huawei.com> References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.102.175] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 09:50:08 -0000 Clarification to the following comment. [snip] This is an area that telcos care about. The issue of unused links is that t= here is also capital investment into such unused links, not just power usag= e. .... If I look at my networks, I will be reducing power by reducing par= allel infrastructure. I think that if I was reducing power, I would do this= first. If the re-engineering costs of the network are more than the power = savings. [snip] The method is not to shut down links all the time. The power saving should = be achieved in those off-peak hours. When the load increases, sleeping link= s should be waken up to carry traffic. Therefore sleeping links are not equ= al to unused links or down links.=20 Thanks, Mingui >-----Original Message----- >From: rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of >Alvaro Retana (aretana) >Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 1:03 AM >To: rtgwg@ietf.org >Subject: IETF 86 Minutes Posted > >Hi! > >The minutes have been posted here: >http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/86/minutes/minutes-86-rtgwg > >Many thanks to Sue Hares for being our note taker. > >Please send any corrections/additions. > >Thanks! > >Alvaro. From zhangmingui@huawei.com Mon Apr 8 02:51:46 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68DCC21F92EC for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 02:51:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rcTITPbe9KvP for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 02:51:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CF4E21F92C9 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 02:51:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml203-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id ARP33239; Mon, 08 Apr 2013 09:49:55 +0000 (GMT) Received: from LHREML406-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.243) by lhreml203-edg.huawei.com (172.18.7.221) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 10:49:25 +0100 Received: from NKGEML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.35) by lhreml406-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.243) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.7; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 10:49:52 +0100 Received: from NKGEML508-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.7.233]) by nkgeml404-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.35]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.007; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 17:49:49 +0800 From: Mingui Zhang To: "curtis@occnc.com" , "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" Subject: RE: IETF 86 Minutes Posted Thread-Topic: IETF 86 Minutes Posted Thread-Index: AQHOM6YYVDyou37bmUmFjXZXIzrGaJjLhQrQ Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 09:49:49 +0000 Message-ID: <4552F0907735844E9204A62BBDD325E732B0ABD6@nkgeml508-mbx.china.huawei.com> References: Your message of "Tue, 02 Apr 2013 17:03:16 -0000." <201304071537.r37FbwRf078126@gateway1.orleans.occnc.com> In-Reply-To: <201304071537.r37FbwRf078126@gateway1.orleans.occnc.com> Accept-Language: en-US, zh-CN Content-Language: zh-CN X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.111.102.175] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Cc: "rtgwg@ietf.org" X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 09:51:46 -0000 Hi Curtis,=20 I think the judgment you made was based on these slides: http://www.nanog.o= rg/meetings/nanog54/presentations/Wednesday/Wobker.pdf.=20 But these slides do not say the card temperature is determined by the traff= ic load. Even a card does not carry any traffic, it has to be provisioned w= ith a high level of idle power (more than 80% as we measured). The differen= ce between the card temperatures under the idle state and under the full-sp= eed state is far less than you implied.=20 Moreover, the "temperature" the slides mentioned is the ambient temp rather= than the card temp. The increase of load on a chip means more heat, but me= anwhile it will be removed by the heatsink and airflow. So the contribution= it makes to the ambient temp is slim. Based on our measurement, I'd tell y= ou that the change of the traffic load on a card almost has no effect on th= e fan speed at all. Having said above, I must say that we never aggregate traffic to the extrem= e case. You can find a threshold was set in our model for the QoS considera= tion. A low 50% was used. The slides said " line-cards are dominant consumers" while cooling power is= only a small amount of the total power. The power consumes by one or two l= ine-cards may outweigh the total cooling power. If we can brings several li= ne-cards down, we surely save power even if the cooling system runs at its = full speed and consumes more power than its normal speed. In summary, we can get a net gain of power saving by traffic aggregation an= d power down line-cards regardless of the change of the cooling power. Thanks, Mingui >-----Original Message----- >From: rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtgwg-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of >Curtis Villamizar >Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2013 11:38 PM >To: Alvaro Retana (aretana) >Cc: rtgwg@ietf.org >Subject: Re: IETF 86 Minutes Posted > > >In message > >"Alvaro Retana (aretana)" writes: > >> Hi! >> >> The minutes have been posted here: >http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/86/minu=3D >> tes/minutes-86-rtgwg >> >> Many thanks to Sue Hares for being our note taker. >> >> Please send any corrections/additions. >> >> Thanks! >> >> Alvaro. > > >WGLC is on CL requirements, not CL framework. > >The comment I made regarding air flow is that if you concentrate >traffic onto one card that card runs hotter and the fan speed is >determined by the amount of airflow needed to cool the hottest card. >So air flow has to increase, not stay the same and therefore fan power >will increase. > >Curtis >_______________________________________________ >rtgwg mailing list >rtgwg@ietf.org >https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg From aretana@cisco.com Mon Apr 8 11:18:28 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2783721F93A3 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 11:18:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LKy5U2jSY90P for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 11:18:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42BF721F9397 for ; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 11:18:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=910; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1365445107; x=1366654707; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: content-id:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=71WcMtz0o1CdWuiT83moK2xZPFFi6UJEiGizbDjIii4=; b=WGN28KODeKwaNJuOP9Ulw6UEFKUqpWMnOozubcTPRCfxateZdVrobgFw SaCV6Im5Br25OCnae61lT31danfdfn77vAmeLCf1x0S2KusmIMgQ8k6Gs hSblO6j0ldguthmsOwLdmmFk54asKNpYTUOOT83gge2B1ZPqiL1R1odwV w=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AioFAKAJY1GtJXG+/2dsb2JhbABRgwY2wSuBCxZ0giEBBDo/EgEIIhRCJQIEDgUIAYgLDL0/jXKBAAYrB4JgYQOoAoMLgig X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,432,1363132800"; d="scan'208";a="193342536" Received: from rcdn-core2-3.cisco.com ([173.37.113.190]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 08 Apr 2013 18:18:22 +0000 Received: from xhc-rcd-x13.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x13.cisco.com [173.37.183.87]) by rcdn-core2-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r38IIMKt029816 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 8 Apr 2013 18:18:22 GMT Received: from xmb-aln-x15.cisco.com ([169.254.9.69]) by xhc-rcd-x13.cisco.com ([173.37.183.87]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Mon, 8 Apr 2013 13:18:21 -0500 From: "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" To: "curtis@occnc.com" Subject: Re: IETF 86 Minutes Posted Thread-Topic: IETF 86 Minutes Posted Thread-Index: AQHOM6XkKe4hpEqjjEarH2A1AG2DEpjMtF0A Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2013 18:18:21 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <201304071537.r37FbwRf078126@gateway1.orleans.occnc.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.117.15.7] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "rtgwg@ietf.org" X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2013 18:18:28 -0000 I updated the minutes with this correction. Thanks! Alvaro. On 4/7/13 11:37 AM, "Curtis Villamizar" wrote: > >In message=20 > >"Alvaro Retana (aretana)" writes: >=20 >> Hi! >> =20 >> The minutes have been posted here: >>http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/86/minu=3D >> tes/minutes-86-rtgwg >> =20 >> Many thanks to Sue Hares for being our note taker. >> =20 >> Please send any corrections/additions. >> =20 >> Thanks! >> =20 >> Alvaro. > > >WGLC is on CL requirements, not CL framework. > >The comment I made regarding air flow is that if you concentrate >traffic onto one card that card runs hotter and the fan speed is >determined by the amount of airflow needed to cool the hottest card. >So air flow has to increase, not stay the same and therefore fan power >will increase. > >Curtis From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com Tue Apr 9 17:53:40 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5E9321F8EEB for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2013 17:53:40 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.84 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.84 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.759, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A6GVD1GN0izG for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2013 17:53:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pa0-f41.google.com (mail-pa0-f41.google.com [209.85.220.41]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B86E21F8EBC for ; Tue, 9 Apr 2013 17:53:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pa0-f41.google.com with SMTP id kx1so6481pab.14 for ; Tue, 09 Apr 2013 17:53:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=JcvbZ410ew3sYrHcbW8Ql5Vv6c5ovpGM+9d9vceD5o4=; b=w5gjRa7tOARC5iUfJaGCxkThWMqT9jy3sBe/4itGJ4l8EVt+my7SPM2Mmgom/vhWxG lsx3Vor55qUdEB5ZduXtYUP0J+dJTWHtw8rxdfcMpvbwHO3vehQ65oU1ZcWBeDgF1JR+ LsVgBjfoqRE9spBhAXe8uLFUnSnpdZs0lUDZQbLBNnckrIztQa+RrrRpRsjiqBCZdGem dHoV994hNvp5y/6x8H/Jn/C3HLp+428BNSmg8HDhMqlOTnfXJ+mo8YAK6tT8+uRR6VDD NiocS9AZwq6XfudCA1DEO3YRH0q3DJEklMbLXQTexalP7Rz1GBB8cChLXahuB3UbcP+v hlAw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.66.144.5 with SMTP id si5mr526148pab.6.1365555220109; Tue, 09 Apr 2013 17:53:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.69.8.2 with HTTP; Tue, 9 Apr 2013 17:53:40 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 02:53:40 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Editors From: Abdussalam Baryun To: rtgwg@ietf.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 00:53:41 -0000 Please note that I had difficulty in routing area or MANET WG explaing my comments and discussing with editors just to understand my point of views and edit few changes, but failed, it seems that they only follow ADs, or I just don't know how they think. Are editors taking any training? AB From akatlas@gmail.com Thu Apr 11 15:53:23 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AE1121F88DB for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 15:53:23 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zgIS0MQjIbjv for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 15:53:23 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-ie0-x236.google.com (mail-ie0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99D6521F86FA for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 15:53:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ie0-f182.google.com with SMTP id at1so2734242iec.27 for ; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 15:53:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=rZiadOHs+KAoOhe2dlNvC4QMmCUZQmHKUF1wk/vlBSY=; b=HEky9ytdee8eyI/In+MZ7F7vW024545Aq7AnIQeCZGecqmSycbF+YmPWk8QRvI3Kvj 7iMp7S9LwxECdJYoIZ0EksxkGxFSou8tSEWoSrXkGLeag1dyn0VdmzhhpVMaXJjJWjJ3 q01qtVwvWmxF95p7I+BcvSLptzOMKAtoiaL9DB2FtLxSQUtZWoTgrBqBc+Z65jqIe+9X YZg6cSzxP8JS4aPMPWs937wm3nEozKAweyE6bt/ZOPSaJtvMSlD+wpc0veCQYixHza52 jP3+MfzdYBWYOGsAUu+bUBtAt2BnqSaIuYAqLtv732in5+ZQclP+57jvHZl7i1MVWWF0 Lc8g== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.17.166 with SMTP id p6mr256184igd.12.1365720796282; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 15:53:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.44.169 with HTTP; Thu, 11 Apr 2013 15:53:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 18:53:16 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: WGLC on draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirements-09 From: Alia Atlas To: "rtgwg@ietf.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae9340cc9ecce0b04da1da644 X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 22:53:23 -0000 --14dae9340cc9ecce0b04da1da644 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 The WGLC on draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirements-09 is long since done. I apologize for the delay. We will work on progressing the updated draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirements-10. I'd encourage feedback on draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-framework and draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-use-cases. I expect that we'll be doing a WG Last Call on at least one before Berlin. Alia On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Alia Atlas wrote: > This is to start a working group last call on > draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirements-09. > The WGLC will conclude on March 15; extra time is given to include the > IETF meeting. > > Please read and send comments. > > Thanks, > Alia & Alvaro > --14dae9340cc9ecce0b04da1da644 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

The WGLC on draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirements-09 is long si= nce done. =A0I apologize for the delay.

We will work on progressi= ng the updated draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirements-10.

I'd encourage feedback on draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-framework and = draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-use-cases. =A0I expect that

we'll b= e doing a WG Last Call on at least one before Berlin.

Alia

On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Alia Atlas <akatlas= @gmail.com> wrote:

This is to start a working group last call o= n draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirements-09.
The WGLC will conclude on March = 15; extra time is given to include the IETF meeting.

Please read and send comments.

Thanks,
Alia & Alvaro

--14dae9340cc9ecce0b04da1da644-- From maho@nic.dtag.de Fri Apr 12 04:13:46 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C03D021F89E2 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 04:13:46 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.8 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, HELO_MISMATCH_DE=1.448, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q44ko6rM39BM for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 04:13:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from owl.lab.dtag.de (Owl.lab.DTAG.DE [194.25.1.236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAFF921F8B08 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 04:13:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by owl.lab.dtag.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42A01595BC3; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 13:13:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.16.101] (o.Hippogryff.lab.dtag.de [194.25.10.166]) by owl.lab.dtag.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 129DB595BC0; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 13:13:44 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <5167EC6A.80107@nic.dtag.de> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 13:13:46 +0200 From: Martin Horneffer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" Subject: Re: WG Adoption Requested for draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-01 References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------070602060206010800090007" Cc: "draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability@tools.ietf.org" , "rtgwg@ietf.org" X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 11:13:46 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------070602060206010800090007 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From the point of view of yet another operator: I strongly support adopting this document. Martin Am 02.04.2013 19:17, schrieb Alvaro Retana (aretana): > Hi! > > The authors of 'Operational management of Loop Free Alternates' > (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-01) have > requested that rtgwg adopt their draft as a WG document. > > Authors and Contributors: Please respond indicating whether or not you > are aware of any relevant IPR. The draft will not progress until we > have received a response from each author/contributor. > > Please send any comments to the list by April 16, 2013. > > Thanks!! > > Alvaro. > > > > _______________________________________________ > rtgwg mailing list > rtgwg@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg ############################################## # Mail Account for technical purposes only ############################################## --------------070602060206010800090007 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

From the point of view of yet another operator:

I strongly support adopting this document.

Martin

Am 02.04.2013 19:17, schrieb Alvaro Retana (aretana):

Hi!

The authors of 'Operational management of Loop Free Alternates' (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-01) have requested that rtgwg adopt their draft as a WG document.

Authors and Contributors: Please respond indicating whether or not you are aware of any relevant IPR. The draft will not progress until we have received a response from each author/contributor.

Please send any comments to the list by April 16, 2013.

Thanks!!

Alvaro.
_______________________________________________
rtgwg mailing list
rtgwg@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg

##############################################
# Mail Account for technical purposes only
##############################################

--------------070602060206010800090007-- From curtis@occnc.com Fri Apr 12 09:25:51 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBA6121F8F5C for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:25:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.495 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.495 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id EP3N+S2dYQn3 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:25:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gateway1.orleans.occnc.com (unknown [173.9.106.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33B9421F8F58 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:25:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from harbor1.ipv6.occnc.com (harbor1.ipv6.occnc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1545::2:819]) (authenticated bits=0) by gateway1.orleans.occnc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r3CGNILP047308; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 12:23:18 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from curtis@occnc.com) Message-Id: <201304121623.r3CGNILP047308@gateway1.orleans.occnc.com> To: Abdussalam Baryun From: Curtis Villamizar Subject: Re: Editors In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 10 Apr 2013 02:53:40 +0200." Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 12:23:18 -0400 Cc: rtgwg@ietf.org X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: curtis@occnc.com List-Id: Routing Area Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 16:25:52 -0000 In message Abdussalam Baryun writes: > Please note that I had difficulty in routing area or MANET WG explaing > my comments and discussing with editors just to understand my point of > views and edit few changes, but failed, it seems that they only follow > ADs, or I just don't know how they think. > > Are editors taking any training? > > AB It is not clear from your email what draft you are talking about or why this email is on the RTGWG mailing list. I suggest that you try putting your comments in writing in an email and send it to someone to review for clarity before sending to the mailing list. If you are talking about comments at the microphone at a meeting, then perhaps written comments would clear things up. In general written comments on the mailing list are supposed to count for more than verbal comments at the mic at an IETF meeting, though some would argue that is not the case. Authors are obligated to respond to comments about WG drafts, particularly in last call. If the comments were not clear, a response asking for clarification is considered sufficient, awaiting the clarification. Curtis From curtis@occnc.com Fri Apr 12 09:34:14 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61E0921F8EB3 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:34:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.495 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.495 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ga6FsgmL7oEl for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:34:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gateway1.orleans.occnc.com (unknown [173.9.106.132]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAE6221F8E9A for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 09:34:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from harbor1.ipv6.occnc.com (harbor1.ipv6.occnc.com [IPv6:2001:470:1f07:1545::2:819]) (authenticated bits=0) by gateway1.orleans.occnc.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r3CGVgdg047326; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 12:31:42 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from curtis@occnc.com) Message-Id: <201304121631.r3CGVgdg047326@gateway1.orleans.occnc.com> To: Alia Atlas From: Curtis Villamizar Subject: Re: WGLC on draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirements-09 In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 11 Apr 2013 18:53:16 EDT." Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 12:31:42 -0400 Cc: "rtgwg@ietf.org" X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: curtis@occnc.com List-Id: Routing Area Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 16:34:14 -0000 In message Alia Atlas writes: > The WGLC on draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirements-09 is long since done. I > apologize for the delay. We will work on progressing the updated > draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirements-10. Horray! Been busy perhaps? > I'd encourage feedback on draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-framework and > draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-use-cases. I expect that > we'll be doing a WG Last Call on at least one before Berlin. > > Alia The CL Use Cases is a fairly quick read. I would appreciate comments on that document in particular. It is purely informational, but as long as the information is accurate (and useful) we could progress this document. CL Framework will be updated now that we have settled on a set of documents for delay and jitter. These are the soon to be updated draft-atlas-mpls-te-express-path, draft-ietf-ospf-te-metric-extensions, and draft-previdi-isis-te-metric-extensions. Other than that (and RFC6790 no longer being a draft), very little is expected to change for now. CL Use Cases is farther along and it is easier to focus on one document at a time. Comments on either document would be greatly appreciated, but if you have limited time, CL Use Cases first pleast. Curtis > On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Alia Atlas wrote: > > > This is to start a working group last call on > > draft-ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirements-09. > > The WGLC will conclude on March 15; extra time is given to include the > > IETF meeting. > > > > Please read and send comments. > > > > Thanks, > > Alia & Alvaro From abdussalambaryun@gmail.com Fri Apr 12 10:10:19 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B0C521F890D for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 10:10:19 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.566 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.566 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.032, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id IbybwFY0vzTl for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 10:10:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-pd0-f172.google.com (mail-pd0-f172.google.com [209.85.192.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0481621F8758 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 10:10:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pd0-f172.google.com with SMTP id 5so1518677pdd.17 for ; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 10:10:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=X+FJ88WCTX3CB3j0hulXslmnjruh6f5VH8N+VcekNRo=; b=gyTMVbICFoTbOyyF0IYsG8poNQL7JSl+pXu7X+qlaQj/WNkp2rMJXM99GbyH5IeIgS jmAZJah7mNRNplykQ8GsloDexrVRI1vG3Rq0oviqLBVvzPMyw+ZGViT/284uWldbce9o qvab04V2uoRKfsdUQuCIXo6zF6241rlhMfi6jPpjPytSUvh+K+BUqHogYoSr1QIl+/0H EIvp3XRFEUx/yoE2gUs/BYqkJrAQjLiZ5kL5yy9ax/3lncGGGMxCMadgMcgY8wGFJRkS +GfmMFcqrUfq1G9nmzBZ84ZqN8o9x7XwZXHohyNQgswCaUDWmZrhpkHzuoy1w9sX3rEc 5aqw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.66.76.170 with SMTP id l10mr16309680paw.190.1365786618676; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 10:10:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.69.8.2 with HTTP; Fri, 12 Apr 2013 10:10:18 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201304121623.r3CGNILP047308@gateway1.orleans.occnc.com> References: <201304121623.r3CGNILP047308@gateway1.orleans.occnc.com> Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 18:10:18 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Editors From: Abdussalam Baryun To: curtis@occnc.com Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d042fdb8a3ed07604da2cfa70 Cc: rtgwg@ietf.org X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2013 17:10:19 -0000 --f46d042fdb8a3ed07604da2cfa70 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I appologies I made an error in sending to the destination address, AB On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Curtis Villamizar wrote: > > In message < > CADnDZ8-5ZPYKUU2hzXUnjX0WEEAVmofm_3ncLV-TNT7iY-dRuw@mail.gmail.com> > Abdussalam Baryun writes: > > > Please note that I had difficulty in routing area or MANET WG explaing > > my comments and discussing with editors just to understand my point of > > views and edit few changes, but failed, it seems that they only follow > > ADs, or I just don't know how they think. > > > > Are editors taking any training? > > > > AB > > > It is not clear from your email what draft you are talking about or > why this email is on the RTGWG mailing list. > > I suggest that you try putting your comments in writing in an email > and send it to someone to review for clarity before sending to the > mailing list. If you are talking about comments at the microphone at > a meeting, then perhaps written comments would clear things up. > > In general written comments on the mailing list are supposed to count > for more than verbal comments at the mic at an IETF meeting, though > some would argue that is not the case. Authors are obligated to > respond to comments about WG drafts, particularly in last call. If > the comments were not clear, a response asking for clarification is > considered sufficient, awaiting the clarification. > > Curtis > --f46d042fdb8a3ed07604da2cfa70 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I appologies I made an error in sending to the destin= ation address,

=A0

On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 5:23 PM, Cu= rtis Villamizar <curtis@occnc.com> wrote:

In message <CADnDZ8-5ZPYKUU2hzXUnjX0WEEAVmofm_3ncLV-TNT7iY-dR= uw@mail.gmail.com>

Abdussalam Baryun writes:

> Please note that I had difficulty in routing area or MANET WG explaing=
> my comments and discussing with editors just to understand my point of=
> views and edit few changes, but failed, it seems that they only follow=
> ADs, or I just don't know how they think.
>
> Are editors taking any training?
>
> AB

It is not clear from your email what draft you are talking abou= t or
why this email is on the RTGWG mailing list.

I suggest that you try putting your comments in writing in an email
and send it to someone to review for clarity before sending to the
mailing list. =A0If you are talking about comments at the microphone at
a meeting, then perhaps written comments would clear things up.

In general written comments on the mailing list are supposed to count
for more than verbal comments at the mic at an IETF meeting, though
some would argue that is not the case. =A0Authors are obligated to
respond to comments about WG drafts, particularly in last call. =A0If
the comments were not clear, a response asking for clarification is
considered sufficient, awaiting the clarification.

Curtis

--f46d042fdb8a3ed07604da2cfa70-- From internet-drafts@ietf.org Thu Apr 18 10:15:37 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36E1A21F91BB; Thu, 18 Apr 2013 10:15:37 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.494 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.494 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.106, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id y5ENuHUBWbB8; Thu, 18 Apr 2013 10:15:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DB9E21F91A5; Thu, 18 Apr 2013 10:15:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtgwg-mofrr-01.txt X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 4.44 Message-ID: <20130418171536.22556.1832.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 10:15:36 -0700 Cc: rtgwg@ietf.org X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2013 17:15:37 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts director= ies. This draft is a work item of the Routing Area Working Group Working Group = of the IETF. Title : Multicast only Fast Re-Route Author(s) : Apoorva Karan Clarence Filsfils Dino Farinacci IJsbrand Wijnands Bruno Decraene Uwe Joorde Wim Henderickx Filename : draft-ietf-rtgwg-mofrr-01.txt Pages : 15 Date : 2013-04-18 Abstract: As IPTV deployments grow in number and size, service providers are looking for solutions that minimize the service disruption due to faults in the IP network carrying the packets for these services. This draft describes a mechanism for minimizing packet loss in a network when node or link failures occur. Multicast only Fast Re- Route (MoFRR) works by making simple enhancements to multicast routing protocols such as PIM and mLDP. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rtgwg-mofrr There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-rtgwg-mofrr-01 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=3Ddraft-ietf-rtgwg-mofrr-01 Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From aretana@cisco.com Mon Apr 22 15:48:39 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 541AF11E80D3 for ; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 15:48:39 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -10.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JAZVW3pUFVc1 for ; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 15:48:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E92911E80BA for ; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 15:48:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=3902; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1366670918; x=1367880518; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to: mime-version; bh=9OoaNRChZ9z70hZdYPt2kjj4m1QaJBpy+4a/j5FCQCk=; b=VwmgUGXixGXOxjb5vvXxeR1TfFEtlQgP+D7yXVVE9b8NwE4VFCEP9QGe DkRlVuAnC0NIc5LGNtAjaGlcFzDwaEb8YOlkq+zVQwwPT/YESHuScs47+ udg7IJOrwOy4L3b3P9CDk8v4r1C47zBBQ8wK+WHKLrFAiWSztMhPRR1wl I=; X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ai8FABm9dVGtJXHB/2dsb2JhbABPgkJENrhWAYg5gQUWdIIhAQR5EgEIBB4dORQRAgQOBQiIDAy7ZI8OMQdjggNhA5g4j3eCfw2CKA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,529,1363132800"; d="scan'208,217";a="201737784" Received: from rcdn-core2-6.cisco.com ([173.37.113.193]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 22 Apr 2013 22:48:38 +0000 Received: from xhc-rcd-x01.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x01.cisco.com [173.37.183.75]) by rcdn-core2-6.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r3MMmcxN006678 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 22 Apr 2013 22:48:38 GMT Received: from xmb-aln-x15.cisco.com ([169.254.9.219]) by xhc-rcd-x01.cisco.com ([173.37.183.75]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 17:48:37 -0500 From: "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" To: "rtgwg@ietf.org" Subject: Re: WG Adoption Requested for draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-01 Thread-Topic: WG Adoption Requested for draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-01 Thread-Index: AQHOL8YCvDlawYGJxkepKR3LpfhOmJjjCEKA Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 22:48:36 +0000 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.150.52.194] Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_BBD66FD99311804F80324E8139B3C94E11D87010xmbalnx15ciscoc_" MIME-Version: 1.0 Cc: "draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability@tools.ietf.org" X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 22:48:39 -0000 --_000_BBD66FD99311804F80324E8139B3C94E11D87010xmbalnx15ciscoc_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi! The period for comments has ended. We received 11 comments supporting the adoption, which included 2 of the 3 = contributors and 3 of the 4 authors. Given that and the support at the las= t meeting, there is consensus to adopt the work. Also, all the authors and contributors have confirmed that they are not awa= re of any IPR related to this draft. Authors: Please republish the draft with the updated name draft-rtgwg-lfa-= manageability. Thanks! Alvaro. On 4/2/13 1:17 PM, "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" > wrote: Hi! The authors of 'Operational management of Loop Free Alternates' (http://too= ls.ietf.org/html/draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-01) have requested= that rtgwg adopt their draft as a WG document. Authors and Contributors: Please respond indicating whether or not you are = aware of any relevant IPR. The draft will not progress until we have recei= ved a response from each author/contributor. Please send any comments to the list by April 16, 2013. Thanks!! Alvaro. --_000_BBD66FD99311804F80324E8139B3C94E11D87010xmbalnx15ciscoc_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hi!

The period for comments has ended.

We received 11 comments supporting the adoption, which included 2 of t= he 3 contributors and 3 of the 4 authors. Given that and the support = at the last meeting, there is consensus to adopt the work.

Also, all the authors and contributors have confirmed that they are no= t aware of any IPR related to this draft.

Authors: Please republish the draft with the updated name draft-= rtgwg-lfa-manageability.

Thanks!

Alvaro.

On 4/2/13 1:17 PM, "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" <aretana@cisco.com> wrote:

Hi!

The authors of 'Operational management of Loop Free Alternates' (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-01= ) have requested that rtgwg adopt their draft as a WG document.

Authors and Contributors: Please respond indicating whether or not you= are aware of any relevant IPR. The draft will not progress until we = have received a response from each author/contributor.

Please send any comments to the list by April 16, 2013.

Thanks!!

Alvaro.

--_000_BBD66FD99311804F80324E8139B3C94E11D87010xmbalnx15ciscoc_-- From hammondjohnson@hushmail.com Sat Apr 27 16:39:48 2013 Return-Path: X-Original-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: rtgwg@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D70CC21F99AE for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 16:39:48 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.599 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6XLBAl78zHD1 for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 16:39:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp10.hushmail.com (smtp10a.hushmail.com [65.39.178.239]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8236021F998E for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 16:39:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp10.hushmail.com (smtp10a.hushmail.com [65.39.178.239]) by smtp10.hushmail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 1D7E81B5355 for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 18:03:18 +0000 (UTC) X-hush-relay-time: 220 X-hush-relay-id: b1bd903faba185ee07e5a0ed3a1fde37 Received: from smtp.hushmail.com (w5.hushmail.com [65.39.178.80]) by smtp10.hushmail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 18:03:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.hushmail.com (Postfix, from userid 99) id DD40CE6736; Sat, 27 Apr 2013 18:03:17 +0000 (UTC) MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 14:03:17 -0400 To: rtgwg@ietf.org Subject: Biggest Fake Conference in Computer Science From: hammondjohnson@hushmail.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Message-Id: <20130427180317.DD40CE6736@smtp.hushmail.com> X-BeenThere: rtgwg@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Routing Area Working Group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 27 Apr 2013 23:39:49 -0000 We are researchers from different parts of the world and conducted a study on the world’s biggest bogus computer science conference WORLDCOMP ( http://sites.google.com/site/worlddump1 ) organized by Prof. Hamid Arabnia from University of Georgia, USA. We submitted a fake paper to WORLDCOMP 2011 and again (the same paper with a modified title) to WORLDCOMP 2012. This paper had numerous fundamental mistakes. Sample statements from that paper include: (1). Binary logic is fuzzy logic and vice versa (2). Pascal developed fuzzy logic (3). Object oriented languages do not exhibit any polymorphism or inheritance (4). TCP and IP are synonyms and are part of OSI model (5). Distributed systems deal with only one computer (6). Laptop is an example for a super computer (7). Operating system is an example for computer hardware Also, our paper did not express any conceptual meaning. However, it was accepted both the times without any modifications (and without any reviews) and we were invited to submit the final paper and a payment of $500+ fee to present the paper. We decided to use the fee for better purposes than making Prof. Hamid Arabnia (Chairman of WORLDCOMP) rich. After that, we received few reminders from WORLDCOMP to pay the fee but we never responded. We MUST say that you should look at the above website if you have any thoughts to submit a paper to WORLDCOMP. DBLP and other indexing agencies have stopped indexing WORLDCOMP’s proceedings since 2011 due to its fakeness. See http://www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/conf/icai/index.html for of one of the conferences of WORLDCOMP and notice that there is no listing after 2010. See Section 2 of http://sites.google.com/site/dumpconf for comments from well-known researchers about WORLDCOMP. The status of your WORLDCOMP papers can be changed from scientific to other (i.e., junk or non-technical) at any time. Better not to have a paper than having it in WORLDCOMP and spoil the resume and peace of mind forever! Our study revealed that WORLDCOMP is a money making business, using University of Georgia mask, for Prof. Hamid Arabnia. He is throwing out a small chunk of that money (around 20 dollars per paper published in WORLDCOMP’s proceedings) to his puppet (Mr. Ashu Solo or A.M.G. Solo) who publicizes WORLDCOMP and also defends it at various forums, using fake/anonymous names. The puppet uses fake names and defames other conferences to divert traffic to WORLDCOMP. He also makes anonymous phone calls and tries to threaten the critiques of WORLDCOMP (See Item 7 of Section 5 of above website). That is, the puppet does all his best to get a maximum number of papers published at WORLDCOMP to get more money into his (and Prof. Hamid Arabnia’s) pockets. Monte Carlo Resort (the venue of WORLDCOMP for more than 10 years, until 2012) has refused to provide the venue for WORLDCOMP’13 because of the fears of their image being tarnished due to WORLDCOMP’s fraudulent activities. That is why WORLDCOMP’13 is taking place at a different resort. WORLDCOMP will not be held after 2013. The draft paper submission deadline is over but still there are no committee members, no reviewers, and there is no conference Chairman. The only contact details available on WORLDCOMP’s website is just an email address! Let us make a direct request to Prof. Hamid arabnia: publish all reviews for all the papers (after blocking identifiable details) since 2000 conference. Reveal the names and affiliations of all the reviewers (for each year) and how many papers each reviewer had reviewed on average. We also request him to look at the Open Challenge (Section 6) at https://sites.google.com/site/moneycomp1 Sorry for posting to multiple lists. Spreading the word is the only way to stop this bogus conference. Please forward this message to other mailing lists and people. We are shocked with Prof. Hamid Arabnia and his puppet’s activities http://worldcomp-fake-bogus.blogspot.com Search Google using the keyword worldcomp fake for additional links.