Subject: Re: [midcom] Protocol Evaluation document template

From: Jiri Kuthan <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 11:13:11 +0200

[resent, as the mailing list filtering logic apparently recognized 
 this email to be spam]

I'm personaly not very convinced about efficiency of an iterative
"evaluate-x-pet-protocols" --> "refine requirements" --+
   ^                                                   |
   +---------------------------------------------------+
process either. I guess it would result in a bunch of documents well 
demonstrating that each author's pet protocol makes the requirements
happy, if tweaked enough. 

Nice to have, but I would prefer having a simple, interoperable 
protocol with running code soon. I personaly do not see how we can
approach such an objective using this process. Starting from the
minimum the MidCom protocol must accomplish rather than from maximum
which someone's favorite protocol is capable of seems to me
a much more feasible strategy.

-Jiri

At 05:06 AM 4/1/2002, Jonathan Rosenberg wrote:

>Louis-Nicolas Hamer wrote:
>> 
>> I tend to agree with Jonathan but I also feel that we should move
>> forward
>> with the protocol evaluation as soon as possible...what I am scared of
>> is what
>> some call "analysis-paralysis"...
>
>Since I appear to be in the minority, I'll cease and desist on this
>point. However, I do want to be clear that I was not proposing analysis
>of any sort; the "abstract protocol" is design work - to specify the
>protocol itself in all details but the syntax.
>
>-Jonathan R.

--
Jiri Kuthan            http://iptel.org/~jiri/

_______________________________________________
midcom mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/midcom

---

From: Melinda Shore <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2002 10:04:09 -0500

At 11:13 AM 4/3/02 +0200, Jiri Kuthan wrote:
>process either. 

Good, because that's not what we're doing.

>a much more feasible strategy.

It's been absolutely clear since well before the working group was
chartered that we were going to be expected to base a midcom protocol
on an existing IETF protocol.

Melinda