ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

AW: The Emperor Has No Clothes: Is PANA actually useful?

2006-05-26 14:29:21
Hi Dave,

thanks for your feedback. 
I guess your mail (and Jari's mail) try to be a little bit less biased
in this discussion. 

~snip~

By contrast observations such as "there are better solutions" 

or 'different solutions'

moves into the 
fuzzier and more subjective realm of trying to predict market 

preferences. The 
IETF is not very good at making these predictions.  

That's very nicely phrased. I guess we could have a long discussion
about this subject and why other organizations do not use some IETF
protocols. We all know that there is the 'not invented here' problem,
sometimes a company marketing story ('company X has developed it's own
proprietary protocol') and in some other cases it is an IPR issue.

If we now raise the bar for IETF protocols to a level where we consider
work as 'successful' or 'good' when other organizations make use of
these protocols then we should change our workstyle a little bit. We
could just rubber stamp protocols these SDOs developed on their own ...

~snip~

A small comment when it comes to understand documents:

I have realized that it is popular in standardization organizations to
be temporarly and selectively confused about some things. 

I suspect that you can copy-and-paste Sam's mail, replace PANA with
another protocol and working group name, post it to the IETF mailing
list and you might get a similar response. 

I would find it particularly helpful to have a concise 
statement from someone 
who says that PANA will not work.  Cannot be implemented 
(properly) by virtue of 
technical errors or documentation too confusing to 
understand.  Or cannot be 
deployed and used, by virtue of administrative complexity or, again, 
documentation too confusing to understand.

Absent this, I will ask why it is productive to note that the 
emperor is 
pursuing an idiosynchratic sartorial style?

Sam accidently posted his mail shortly after the heated discussion of
PANA usage at the 3GPP2.
From the comments on this mailing list it is obvious which company was
not favor for PANA (for whatever reason).

Ciao
Hannes

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>