Robin, > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Robin > Whittle > Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 10:14 AM > To: RRG > Subject: Re: [rrg] Recommendation suggestion from RW > > Hi John, > > You wrote: > > >> Further to my suggestion (msg06161) that people write the > >> Recommendation they wish everyone would agree with, here is some text > >> for the currently empty Recommendation section of: > >> > >> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-irtf-rrg-recommendation-05 > >> > >> I would be very happy if everyone agrees to this. However, I know > >> some or many people won't agree with it. > >> > >> I hope to prompt some responses, with reasons for disagreement, such > >> as by detailed arguments regarding: > >> > >> 1 - Why proposals other than Ivip would be the best choice. > > [JD] > > > > I'm not sure whether this is tacky or delusional > > OK - but you haven't suggested why you think it was tacky or delusional. > > I am trying to prompt people into actually debating proposals, rather > than just talking about their own. Point 1 doesn't include people > arguing why Ivip is the best choice, but I would be happy for someone > to do so.
I think part of the problem is that with a few exceptions (such as yourself) those who have their own proposals may be so deeply engrossed in understanding and expressing what they are trying to accomplish that it is impossible to bring our heads up above water long enough to give a deeper consideration for other proposals. Or maybe I am just speaking for myself... Fred [email protected] > I wrote why I believe Ivip is the best choice - including by > addressing every other proposal and arguing why, or pointing to > arguments why, I believe they aren't as good. > > If other people, including yourself perhaps, did the same - if they > explained why their choice of proposal is better than the others, > with specific references to the failings they perceive in all the > others - then I think we would all learn something and a useful > debate would ensue. > > We would certainly learn about what other people think. We would > probably learn something about scalable routing. We might learn > something which changes our understanding and assessment of our own > and other proposals. > > Do you think this is a good idea? If not, what do you suggest as a > technique for fostering debate? > > - Robin > > > > _______________________________________________ > rrg mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list [email protected] http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
