On 2/16/16, 4:37 PM, "iesg on behalf of Joel M. Halpern" <iesg-boun...@ietf.org on behalf of j...@joelhalpern.com> wrote:
Hi! >To phrase the experiment judgment differently, either after tree years >there will be sufficient demonstrated value to justify a permanent >allocation, or there won't. It would take a strange situation to extend >the experimental allocation (although of course we can not foresee every >possible situation.) > >Since I do not expect the IESG to commit to specific criteria (other >than those already documented in RFCs) for granting the permanent >allocation, I don't see much that can be said. > >If you really want, I suppose that we could add a sentence saying that >after the experiment, permanent allocation will be evaluated using the >usual criteria for such requests. The point I'm trying to make is about the evaluation of what you call "sufficient demonstrated value". As you say, the allocation is justified if value is demonstrated, how is that value demonstrated? At this point in time the allocation is being made temporarily so that an experiment can be run. What is the success criteria for that experiment? Thanks! Alvaro. _______________________________________________ lisp mailing list lisp@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
