On 24 Sep 2018, at 15:26, Lou Berger wrote:
Hi Pete,
It's a reasonable question. I think the document serves a
number of purposes:
- It has been the document that has been guiding the scope of the
solutions being worked in the WG this is the one that I think you are
keying off of.
- It also serves a long lived purpose to help those learning / new-to
detnet, to understand the types of applications that can be
supported by DetNet. Again this is about DetNet scope, but learning
about it in the future rather defining it now.
- The final value I think about (I'm sure others have their own
list) is that it allows those WG contributors who are users ensure
that their concerns are addressed by the WG. For them, this document
covers both their contribution and provides a long term reference to
the problems they expect to be served by the technology, both in the
short term deliverables and as the technology evolves in the future.
If you think the Shepherd write up needs to say more, I'm very open to
suggestions.
Actually, better than just saying these things in the shepherd writeup,
I think it's worth saying in the intro of the document. I'll make sure
that's in my editorial comments in the review.
Thanks to you and others for the explanations.
pr
On 9/24/2018 11:43 AM, Pete Resnick wrote:
Hi Lou,
I've got a preliminary question about draft-ietf-detnet-use-cases
that
isn't answered in the intro to the document or in your shepherd
writeup.
I've Cced the WG just to make sure they're in the loop, and I've Cced
the gen-art list and the responsible AD just in case Deborah or any
of
my Genart colleagues wish to say, "Pete, stop worrying your pretty
little head and go finish your Genart review!" And I swear, I'm not
asking this just to delay having to read 79 pages. (OK, maybe a
little.)
What's the motivation behind publishing this document? From the
intro,
it looks like it's purpose was to document the use cases so that the
WG
could do its work. Is there a reason that it needs to be published
for
posterity? Will people in the future need to reference this document?
It
would help me to review the document if I understood why it is being
published instead of simply being a tool that the WG used and now no
longer needs.
I promise, in the meanwhile I'll continue to read the document and
get
the rest of my review finished, but I'd like to understand more about
the purpose of the document.
Thanks,
pr
_______________________________________________
detnet mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/detnet
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
