Hi, Carter. Thanks for your feedback. I have some comments inline below.
I'd also like to encourage all other contributors to provide feedback
over the next week.
Carter Bullard wrote:
I cannot agree with this line of thinking. Of course there is benefit in
having the requirements documented regardless if there are ever any
solutions delivered. And how can solutions be successfully developed,
tested and verified without a published requirements document ??
To be clear, the requirements are already published as I-D documents.
The question is if and when to publish them as RFC documents.
I don't believe anybody is waiting for the requirements to be published
as RFC documents before submitting solutions. If I'm wrong about that
I'd appreciate specific feedback on that.
There are many processes available for modifying the document after
publication.
Many people have put in effort. Finish this phase, get something
successful out of the process and then move on to phase 2.
We are already in "phase 2" as of our rechartering in late 2014. The WG
is currently encouraged (indeed required) to produce solutions for NVO3
overlays. Publishing the requirements documents is not a requirement of
our current charter.
That being said, I do acknowledge that many people have worked on the
requirements documents, and I plan to make sure they get appropriate
credit in the end. That's not really an issue here, as far as I'm concerned.
As a chair, for me the only salient question is how to make sure that
NVO3 produces good and useful protocol specifications. If you have
thoughts specifically on how this question applies to the requirements
drafts then I'd appreciate additional feedback.
Cheers,
-Benson
On Jan 31, 2015, at 10:13 PM, Benson Schliesser <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Dear NVO3 Contributors -
As mentioned during the virtual interim meeting last week, Matthew and
I have been discussing when to publish the various NVO3 requirements
documents. Our view is that there is no real value in publishing
requirements if we fail to also deliver solutions. Further, we expect
that the process of developing solutions will enhance our collective
understanding, and therefore put NVO3 in a better position to evaluate
whether the requirements documents are complete.
Finally, in some cases it may not make sense to have requirements
documents that are separate from the solution. In other words, it is
possible that the requirements may simply be a section of a solution
document. This would need to be evaluated after we have a more firm
idea of what the solution documentation might look like.
Thus, it is our proposal that we should update the milestones to
reflect that the requirements will be published at the same time as
the solutions. We welcome any feedback on this proposal within the
next two weeks.
Cheers,
-Benson & Matthew
_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
_______________________________________________
nvo3 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
