Hi Lorenzo, On 27/03/2015 2:53 am, "Lorenzo Colitti" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >I find it concerning to say that a decision will be made only on the >"work needed" to get to an acceptable solution, without considering the >likelihood of said work happening and who is expected, able, and >especially, willing to do it. In the design team charter the following words appear: "..the design team will estimate the work needed and the associated timeline to get an acceptable, full, standardized solution using each protocol." So the the decision will not be made only on the work needed. Specifying the timeline means the design team must also consider the resources at hand, or reasonably available, to reach an acceptable, full, standardized solution. > >Or, more succintly: what happened to the "running code" part of the IETF >motto? That is certainly not omitted, why do you think it would be? ..Specifically when we look at outputs from the routing area (and Alia can certainly speak for her own Area on this) two reference implementations are generally required. That same ideal was highlighted in the workgroup meeting. So that ethos is very much included. Are there any other comments in either the positive or negative direction? Please WG, speak up. Cheers Terry
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ homenet mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/homenet
