Re: RE: [nmrg] Re: Comments Question aboutdraft-xu-cops-push-00.txt

On Mon, Mar 19, 2007 at 08:51:05AM -0400, Natale, Bob wrote:
 
> [...] The mini-BOF will
> propose a WG to determine the actual make-up of that "best fit" from
> among a set of reasonable alternatives...a degree of "business
> judgment" might not to be applied over and above technical analysis in
> making a final determination, as many of the related standards and open
> source reference projects are at early stages of maturation.

I believe this approach is asking for endless discussions. I would
very much prefer to see a critical number of people agreeing on a
particular approach and committing themself to put energy into working
out the details before a WG is being chartered. Well scoped WGs have a
much better chance to complete in time (whatever that means in the
IETF ;-).

I had the pleasure to participate in a few WGs trying to formulate
requirements before doing the actual work and this has always been a
pain and if you ask me a waste of time. (There might be WGs where this
requirements approach works well but then I did not have the pleasure
to participate in those WGs - or it is because of my absence that it
worked out well. ;-)

/js

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder		 Jacobs University Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>	 P.O. Box 750 561, 28725 Bremen, Germany

_______________________________________________
OPS-AREA mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ops-area