I understand.
The flip side to this is that once a solution is
implemented and deployed, there is lethargy to look at
other solutions (or) to expand the problem space. Then,
there is the legacy of this implementation that
future solutions have to live with.
Anyways, this is all the more why I believe, the protocol
document should at a minimum cover the boundaries of
its applicability.
regards,
suresh
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
[mailto:owner-ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org]On Behalf Of Mike
O'Dell
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 1:47 PM
To: srisuresh(_at_)yahoo(_dot_)com
Cc: Mike O'Dell; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Last Call: Traffic Engineering Extensions to OSPF Version 2
to Proposed Standard
actually, in the IETF, having running code for *one* solution is a good
way
to demonstrate how much of the problem is understood, and if some of
us had our way, it would be impossible to charter a Working Group
*without* the understanding of the problem space being *at least* that
good.
cheers,
-mo
"Always do right. It will gratify some people and astonish the rest."
-Mark Twain