Hi Tony, Your new draft (26 February):
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-rrg-recommendation-01 does not include any of the changes and additions I suggested on 24 February: Ivip map-encap & MHF in draft-irtf-rrg-recommendation-00 http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rrg/current/msg04535.html You expanded the first two taxonomies: 3.1 A Mechanism Taxonomy 3.2 A Functional Taxonomy but changed only a few words in the third: 3.3 The Herrin Taxonomy as can be seen from the Diff1 link from the current version. You added a note about the taxonomies that "Section 3.3 is the most useful so far and is where we will continue to focus our efforts." I had suggested that if you do not expect a taxonomy to be complete that you either delete it or indicate clearly that each such taxonomy is incomplete. On 17 February (message 4520) I had suggested an addition to the 3.1 taxonomy to make it more complete. You wrote here: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rrg/current/msg04533.html The taxonomy in 3.1 is inadequate and not particularly helpful and not really worth further refinement. yet in version 01 you refined and extended 3.1 somewhat, without including my suggested addition. Your initial response to my suggested changes to 3.3, and my reply: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rrg/current/msg04546.html http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rrg/current/msg04547.html So far, my efforts to improve the draft have had little or no effect - and after reading your message 4546 I am unclear on what reasons you might have for not accepting my suggestions or for not discussing them in meaningful detail. Maybe you plan to include or discuss these suggestions in detail - but have not yet had time to do so. I have made a page to track what I think is currently missing from the draft of our forthcoming recommendations: http://www.firstpr.com.au/ip/ivip/RRG-2009/rec/ - Robin _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
