Discipline of Internet Protocol Engineering

Jari Arkko jari.arkko at piuha.net
Wed Jun 4 18:38:44 CEST 2003

Keith Moore wrote:
>>However, I believe
>>there's a more fundamental reason why some charters are or may
>>need to be fuzzy. That reason has to do with the timing when
>>the IETF gets involved, or the scope of the problem. 
> Part of the problem may be that we often want the initial charter to map
> out the entire life cycle of the group.  often this is unrealistic, because
> we really don't understand what the group has to do.  I don't think we 
> should try to nail down details more than about eight months (say two 
> IETF meetings) in advance.  But if we don't have a good idea about what
> a WG is going to be doing over the next few months, with fairly concrete,
> realizable, measurable goals - something's wrong.


We could in addition require that groups produce something concrete
(like an approved document) in that 8 months. If we take in account
that the full protocol (or whatever) can't be done in this time,
this shows a need to produce intermediate deliveries. Often these
are requirements documents, though I'm not quite sure useful they
are. It might be more useful to produce roadmap or architecture


More information about the Problem-statement mailing list