> I respectfully disagree. Before the IETF will attack the
> engineering side of the problem, they should and perhaps
> must be presented with an architecture against which to
> standardize.
that is a bit beyond *research*, though not completely precluded.
this is the iRtf.
if the iEtf demands an architecture on a silver platter, it should
start mining silver and hammering on the platter. oh, and working
on an architecture too.
if the iRtf does come up with one (or three or 42) possible
architectures, very cool. but this is *research*. there is no
obligation of research to produce products. in research, failure
is often as interesting a result as success, whatever failure or
success may mean.
if you pull a rabbit out of the hat, way cool. but, if not, no
blame. rummaging around in hats is research. lapin au vin is
engineering.
randy, who does occasional actual research
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Aug 04 2003 - 04:10:04 EDT