On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 07:51:27 -0800, Tony Hain wrote:
The fact that
they are considered 'emergency' at this point shows that in fact people do
expect new features from the equipment,
it shows that SOME people decided to add new features.
it does not show that the network really needed them.
and the difference between these two points is exactly where open discussion
and agreement among the ietf meeting participants could be helpful.
right now, the folks doing the choosing pretty much have to guess what the
folks doing the using want/need. open discussion could eliminate the guessing.
if, as some have voiced, the community of attendees feel it is essential that
we eat our own dogfood of new features, on our meeting production network, then
we will have agreed to the consequence, assured lack of stability.
if instead the community feels that reliability for a core set of functions is
paramount, then new features can only be added after they are viewed as stable
and low-risk.
d/
---
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
+1.408.246.8253
dcrocker a t ...
WE'VE MOVED to: www.bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf