On 9 Nov 2024, at 17:07, Jim Fenton wrote:
On 9 Nov 2024, at 13:16, Pete Resnick wrote:
On 9 Nov 2024, at 8:38, Jim Fenton wrote:
suggest that the charter acknowledge that scalability is important
and stop there.
Well, I would also like something that is clear that running code is
favored to a completely unimplemented proposal. Text welcome.
I suggest that paragraph 5 of the draft charter be replaced with:
It is expected that design proposals will be tested during the
development of specifications. The working group will favor designs
that are tested with running code and that demonstrate
interoperability.
How about adding, "Scalability is also an important design consideration
that the WG will take into account."? I agree that we ought not be
excluding small providers, but we also can't start adding features (or
at the very least required features) that only work for small providers
and cannot work at scale for the larger ones. As you say, no bad faith
assumed, but we all know of WGs that have gone off the rails with lots
of interesting features that work in theory.
pr
--
Pete Resnick https://www.episteme.net/
All connections to the world are tenuous at best
_______________________________________________
Ietf-dkim mailing list -- ietf-dkim@ietf.org
To unsubscribe send an email to ietf-dkim-le...@ietf.org