Complex Problems

john.loughney at john.loughney at
Fri Jan 10 02:13:59 CET 2003

Hi Randy,

> > I've read them all and actually commented on most of them ... that is
> > not my point.  My point is that I wonder if there is some general
> > malaise in the IETF if the community is not interested in discussing
> > architectural issues now.
> as a co-author of 3439 (which was not really intended as an update
> to 1958), i for one am certainly not disinterested in discussing
> architectural issues.  and i find many folk willing to do so.

That is a good thing.  I was a bit worried by Brian's mail, implying
the community was not interested in talking about architectural issues.
> one problem is that these are not simple issues.  this is not a
> simple space.  and they often do not have 'solutions', but rather
> provide guidance and clues.  and, when that guidance does not fit
> well with someone's plan or product, i guess it may indeed seem as
> if they do not want to discuss architecture.

That makes much sense as well.  I guess that might lead to the suggestion
that architectural discussions / advice are best done as early as possible
- it becomes much more difficult to re-architect things at the IESG
review stage - but you know that.


More information about the Problem-statement mailing list