Re: PS Characterization Clarified

On 13 sep. 2013, at 20:03, Carsten Bormann <cabo(_at_)tzi(_dot_)org> wrote:

> On Sep 13, 2013, at 16:56, Olaf Kolkman <olaf(_at_)NLnetLabs(_dot_)nl> wrote:
>
> > *   Added the Further Consideration section based on discussion on the
> >   mailinglist.
> I believe the current document is fine for a major part of the IETF standards 
> activities.
>
> It is, however, important to keep in mind that the IETF is not a homogeneous 
> organization, not even within each of the quite different areas.  Section 4 
> seems to try to open up the straightjacket created by section 3 a little bit 
> again, but the way it does this is probably the wrong approach.
Note this is not trying to change… I is trying to document what we do now. 

On https://www.iab.org/wp-content/IAB-uploads/2011/04/Bormann.pdf

I am trying to see what one gets if one translates the fallacies into positive 
actions, or answer the question on how do you cope with the fallacy. I notice 
that your draft observes but doesn't seem to recommend. That is not a value 
judgement on the text btw but it doesn't give me insight in if 'this is 
probably wrong' what is the right way? And more important, is there any 
indication we can get there? I believe we had several tries in doing something 
different (better, was the intention of all those that took part in that 
debate) but we never reached consensus. That is why this is not trying to 
change, but tries to document the realities.


Have a nice weekend.

--Olaf

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail