I think it is proper and appropriate for the IRTF
to produce several different requirements documents
(or any other thing we do for that matter).
My reasons are
1. If we were to produce a single document then
it would be very close to being a "standard"
(even though the name would not include those
8 letters). This means that our whole process
would open up to the IETF's way of doing things.
Those of you who have known me for a while
know also that my opinion of "The IETF Process"
is very low indeed.
2. No matter what the IRTF produces, the IETF will
want to take it and play with it. They will change
parts, add new stuff, delete old stuff, and so on.
Whether the IRTF produces 1 or 100 requirements
documents, the IETF _will_ change it. This is not
unreasonable; after all it will then become _their_
work...
One could ask "Why not do this in the IRTF-RRG?". The
answer is simple -- if we did it here then why does
the IRTF-RRG exist? The answer is simple; the IRTF-RRG
is here, really, to allow groups of like-minded people
to form, do some interesting work, and gain review and
so on from a wider group of people with similar interests.
In other words, it is to allow several different groups
to come up with their own views of what the requirements
are for a new routing architecture (or whatever)
3. As the IETF did with IPNG, I would expect that they
will solicit more input. See RFC1550 and then the
responses (starting roughly at RFC1667). Multiple
documents from the IRTF would simply be multiple
solicited inputs.
Frank Kastenholz
==================================================
My preferrred signature is:
This information is for the sole use of
whoever receives it and may contain confusing,
enlightening, enraging, entertaining,
irritating, or just plain stupid information,
including without limitation, double-secret-
probation information belonging to [CENSORED
BY THE NSA/FBI/MOUSE]. Any unauthorized review,
use, disclosure, or distribution outside of an
establishment serving alchohol is prohibited on
days that do not end in Y.
But our ******'d lawyers would rather have:
=======================================
This email message is for the sole use of the intended recipient (s) and may
contain confidential and privileged information, including without
limitation, Confidential and/or Proprietary Information belonging to
Unisphere Networks, Inc. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original
message.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 04 2003 - 04:10:04 EDT