Bob Braden wrote:
*>
*> But that's really not the point here. The role of an _engineering_ taskforce
*> is to act like engineers, not a vanity press. Our output should be educated
*> guidance to the wider community - created with diligence and offered with
humility.
*> We can do no more and should do no less.
Grenville,
Nicely said!! I would like to see your motto inscribed over the
IETF portals... "We create with diligence and offer with humility".
Bob Braden
Bob, I agree this is a good ethos, which I support, and in general, the
IETF is trending back in this direction, the discussion over the last
~year of meatier meetings being one example of the trend in this
direction; yours, Keith's and Grenville's expressions being others. The
specific issue though in this case, IMO, was whether engineering was
conflicting with pragmatics (WRT existing deployments) - happily, the OT
thread appears to be flushing this out and moving on. Obviously, the
long-lived tension will always be between under-engineering a solution
and over-engineering a solution. As this subthread shows, discussing the
philosophy doesn't advance the ball on any one particular technical
issue very much, only skilled engineers arguing opposing views (a good
thing) can do that.
Best....