On 6/23/01 at 1:05 PM -0700, Charles E. Perkins wrote:
> oh i agree! the failure to start from working code
is the perniscious failing of most modern IETF WGs
I gather you wouldn't have much sympathy for problem
statements and requirements documents that are in process
within several working groups now. What do you think
about, say, progress within the AAA working group,
which has already finished those phases?
Not to speak for Mike, but how about having this kind of work take
place in the IRTF? It sounds an awful lot like research to me. When
they're done with that and start writing something that looks like it
might be code someday, bring it back into the IETF.
[Every time I bring up the idea of doing something like this in IRTF
to IETF folks who are older and crustier than I am, I get lots of
moans and eye-rolling, but no real explanation of why this is a bad
idea. They seem to have a nice place and lots of space; why don't we
just move in? It seems like the IRTF might also be a nice place to
send some of the folks with half-baked ideas to keep them out of our
hair, though Erik would probably be less interested in that.]
pr
--
Pete Resnick <mailto:presnick(_at_)qualcomm(_dot_)com>
QUALCOMM Incorporated