what are the real problems

[Jeanette Hofmann]

On 22 May 2003 at 7:11, Margaret Wasserman wrote:

> 
> At 11:57 AM 5/22/2003 +0200, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:
> >I don't think that "let's grow a neat thing" and "let a 1000 flowers bloom"
> >are the same thing, are they?
> 
> IMO, these aren't the same thing at all...
> 
> The Postel quote that Randy sent talks about figuring out a
> "consistent path through the space" vs. "filling the rest of
> the space with every alternative approach".  This resonates
> with me.

The problem with consistency is that it depends so much on context. Whether 
step 2 is really consistent with step 1 only shows once step 3 is implemented. 
Consistency can be judged best in retrospect. If used to decide on future 
directions, consistency turns easily into a rhetoric weapon to exclude other 
valid options. It is probably a myth to assume that the development of TCP/IP 
followed principles of consistency. It just looks that way in hindsight. There is 
no inherent logic in further development of network architecture. What is 
needed as guideline is a mission that defines core values and principles, as 
outlined in the process document by Margaret.  

Jeanette
> 
> We shouldn't be hesitant to undertake new work in new
> spaces.  In those cases, we should try, as a community,
> to find a consistent path through the new space.  There
> may be no single true path, but we should try to find a
> consistent path that meets the requirements of practicality
> and simplicity.  In some cases, this may require exploring
> more than one path, and eventually choosing the one that
> works.
> 
> But, we should try to avoid activity that could be considered
> "filling the rest of the space".
> 
> Of course, it isn't always easy to tell these things apart,
> which is why we pay the IESG the big bucks. :-)
> 
> Margaret
> 
> 
> 
> It's not al
> 
> 
> 
>