Cutting through the accumulating sludge (was: Re: Doing the Right Things? and/or WG Quality Processes WG)

john.loughney at john.loughney at
Wed Jun 4 10:16:54 CEST 2003

Hi Dave,

> jlnc> That sounds like a reasonable way forward, but there 
> are the boring
> jlnc> details of where to feed the proposals, get the decision, do
> jlnc> the review, who should take the lead, etc.  I think this is
> jlnc> what we need to decide to do in the next week or two.
> The experience with the SIRS proposal would seem to be 
> instructive here.

Your comments, below, are not too different from what I think should happen.
I don't think that we should have design by committe or anything.  A venue
(mailing list) and potential face-to-face time to discuss it are sufficient
starting points, in my mind.


> Brian Carpenter had an idea. He chatted it up. One soul he talked to was
> particularly taken by the idea and worked with Brian to produce a few
> paragraphs to describe it. Brian floated the paragraphys on a 
> list that seemed relevant. Comments flowed.
> Brian and his unlucky cohort then produced a formal specification,
> iterating on the commentary/revision sequence sequence.
> A test implementation has just started.  Lots of people have said they
> liked the idea.  Some people have volunteered to participate.  We'll see
> whether it is useful.
> The only "formal" part of this was to coordinate with the IETF Chair,
> mostly to make sure that that part of the community did not have
> concerns about this.
> At some point, it will be appropriate for press this into official form,
> but it is not essential to the core development or testing of 
> the idea.
> Many bits of work can be done this way, and frankly I also think they
> should be.  Not all, but many.
> There are substantial benefits, and few detriments. The core benefits
> are staying close to a core (good) idea and getting the details
> delivered relatively quickly. (As far as I know, Brian's idea was first
> floated only at the last IETF.) Hence there is no risk of
> design-by-committe bloat or loss of focus, and there is no significant
> risk of taking forever to produce something.
> d/
> --
>  Dave Crocker <mailto:dcrocker at>
>  Brandenburg InternetWorking <>
>  Sunnyvale, CA  USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>, <fax:+1.866.358.5301>

More information about the Problem-statement mailing list