Re: AD review of: draft-ietf-tewg-measure-05.txt
"Merike Kaeo" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.tewg |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <003501c313e0$0b5b7110$6401a8c0@seabreeze> |
There is indeed a critical need for this sort of document and I strongly agree that the recommendations need to be made more succinct.....there are hints of what is recommended but specific recommendation details should be explicitly stated without ambiguity in them. Jim has made some excellent comments to that effect. - merike ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALABS" <[email protected]> To: "Jim Boyle" <[email protected]> Cc: "Ash, Gerald R (Jerry), ALABS" <[email protected]>; "Tewg (E-mail)" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, May 06, 2003 6:03 AM Subject: RE: AD review of: draft-ietf-tewg-measure-05.txt Jim, > A bit of background - this WG item was intended to make the essential > measurements needed well defined enough that the way these "entities" were > measured across implementations (e.g. vendors) would be consistent. Yes, a critical need. <...> > I recommend we do the following clean up > > - Somewhere provide a CRISP set of recommendations Yes. > - Remove all discussion which does not directly re-enforce a recommendation Or move the discussion to an Annex if it is useful in supporting the recommendations. > - Maybe one option will be to remove the WG item completely Disagree. The need is important (some say 'critical'), I don't recall anyone saying the WG item in not important and should be dropped. Thanks, Jerry