John,
The distinction could be artificial, however, in working
on the problem statement draft the authors very deliberately
made this distinction. They were very careful to avoid use of
"requirements" language, and a few items were considered for
removal as potential "requirements."
On a case-by-case basis, it is often true that it is hard
to distinguish portions of a problem from possible requirements
of a solution. In general, though, it is somewhat easier to
decide whether you want specific documents to describe problems
or requirements.
With the problem statement draft, the intent was to focus
on describing the problem, hoping to make the task of defining
requirements of a solution as easy as possible - but without
attempting to do the task outright.
Baby-steps...
--
Eric
-----Original Message-----
From: John E Drake [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 9:09 AM
To: Benson Schliesser
Cc: Eric Gray; Bocci, Matthew (Matthew); [email protected]
Subject: RE: [nvo3] Poll for WG adoption:
draft-narten-nvo3-overlay-problem-statement-04
Comments inline
Sent from my iPhone
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Benson Schliesser [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 5:46 AM
> To: John E Drake
> Cc: Eric Gray; Bocci, Matthew (Matthew); [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [nvo3] Poll for WG adoption: draft-narten-nvo3-overlay-
> problem-statement-04
>
> If adopted, the draft will be renamed draft-ietf-nvo3-...
JD: And prior to its adoption, its name would be?
>
> At this time we are just talking about adoption of a Problem Statement.
> We will focus on Requirements separately, per our milestones.
JD: The distinction between a problem statement and a set of requirements
seems, in retrospect, to be artificial.
>
> FYI, other text related to the Problem Statement can be contributed
> (and incorporated) after adoption, if that text has WG consensus.
>
> Cheers,
> -Benson
>
>
>
> On Aug 15, 2012, at 8:33, John E Drake <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Support. However, it would be a graceful gesture for the document to
> be renamed to something other than 'draft-narten'. Also, there are
> other requirements drafts. What is their disposition?
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
> >> Of Eric Gray
> >> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2012 4:57 AM
> >> To: Bocci, Matthew (Matthew); [email protected]
> >> Subject: Re: [nvo3] Poll for WG adoption: draft-narten-nvo3-overlay-
> >> problem-statement-04
> >>
> >> Support.
> >>
> >> Note: Several of the authors/co-authors of this draft are on
> vacation
> >> at least this week and possibly next. I think it's fair to assume
> >> that they also support making this draft a WG draft, given that the
> >> request to do so came jointly from the draft authors/co-authors...
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
> >> Of Bocci, Matthew (Matthew)
> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2012 11:48 AM
> >> To: [email protected]
> >> Subject: [nvo3] Poll for WG adoption: draft-narten-nvo3-overlay-
> >> problem-statement-04
> >>
> >> All,
> >>
> >> At the Vancouver IETF, there was considerable support for adopting
> >> draft-narten-nvo3-overlay-problem-statement-03 as an NVO3 working
> >> group document. However, there was also some support for
> >> draft-fang-vpn4dc- problem-statement-01.
> >>
> >> Therefore, the chairs asked authors from both drafts, with help from
> >> Eric Gray, to work together on a common problem statement draft, the
> >> result of which is the subject of this adoption poll.
> >>
> >> If you support adoption of
> >> draft-narten-nvo3-overlay-problem-statement-
> >> 04,
> >> please reply to this thread with 'support'.
> >>
> >> If you do not support adoption, please reply to this thread with 'do
> >> not support', and state your reasons.
> >>
> >> This poll will close on Tuesday 28th August 2012.
> >>
> >> Note that we will be polling for adoption of the NVO3 framework
> draft
> >> separately. We will start that poll in a separate thread, shortly.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> Matthew & Benson
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> nvo3 mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> nvo3 mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
> > _______________________________________________
> > nvo3 mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
