Latency

[Melinda Shore]

> How widespread is this perception? I have no idea WHY individuals in the =
> IETF would think they were "not even allowed to talk about protocol =
> development" before they go "extensive 'requirements' and 'framework' =
> documents".

It's pretty common, during the requirements process, for
some proposed requirements to be shot down because they
describe mechanism rather than requirements, and I expect
that may be misconstrued as meaning that protocol
discussions are taboo in general.  There's also the problem
of requirements being reverse-engineered from existing
protocols, and resistance to that may be misunderstood as
well.

Melinda