On 2014-05-12 14:54, George, Wes wrote:
I think the authors need to look at this
http://iepg.org/2014-03-02-ietf89/ietf89_iepg_jmauch.pdf and make
some
updates to section 7. Doesn’t really seem like all of those problems
are
historical.
Indeed!
It would be extremely helpful to have a summary or conclusion section
that
makes it clearer which problems are still in need of a solution,
especially if the goal is to have IETF provide all or part of that
solution. I think that it is useful to categorize the problems into
things
that are essentially old, solved problems and therefore used as FUD
objections vs things that are still known issues, but a clearer call
to
action to resolve the still outstanding issues would make this draft
much
stronger.
OK, I'll circle with Eric and others on this and see if we can expand
on this a bit. If you've got specific things in mind please send text.
Draft also needs text in the security considerations section.
Lastly, why is this a standards-track document and not informational?
Good point, it should indeed be informational.
Thanks for the review Wes,
-danny
_______________________________________________
GROW mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/grow
