On Monday, May 19, 2003 9:12 AM, Jeffrey Race
[SMTP:jrace(_at_)attglobal(_dot_)net] wrote:
8<...>8
...I have attempted to draft some ideas
at
<http://www.camblab.com/misc/univ_std.txt>
and the thinking which led to the above
<http://www.camblab.com/nugget/spam_03.pdf>
Comments welcome.
You should add some descriptions or definitions of terminology. Particularly -
'pollution'[what does this mean? how is it manifested, specifically? do not be
overly broad and just list things - this appears to be a concept and not a
'list'], 'degradation'[of what?], 'at any point' [node, nat, net?], 'the
purpose of the Internet' [what exactly is being protected?] - I think you
should try re-working section 1.2 and 7.
The taxonomy presented in 1.3.1 should be researched more thoroughly. There
are other methods see www.irtf.org/asrg/
It seems most of this is troubled by a lack of definitions of terminology.
Please try to be precise in your terms and how they are used. I can see the
point you are trying to make but the idea's are 'polluted' by a lot of opinion
not substantiated by any easily detectable methodology.
Section 2.5 seems antithetical to your over-arching premise. Perhaps with a
better definition of scope, specifically identifying your assumptions, goals
and how those goals will be addressed will help.
More empirical information should be presented in your argument stating
'present experience' without the attendant information and methodology for
analysis is not empirical it is anecdotal.
[The following is not true, please provide a valid premise. The truth is
equally salient.]
"The Internet's design and management were predicated on voluntary
cooperation, self-imposed good behavior, and the non-profit
motivational structure of custodians of Internet Resources (IR)
extant at its inception."
I hope this helps. Also, try rfc2505 at the www.ietf.org rfc page.
-e
_______________________________________________
Asrg mailing list
Asrg(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg