Hi Balaji- You're right that perception is by nature subjective. Tony may have looked at the fact that you're proposing BGP changes and decided it was operations; I looked at it and saw that the bulk of your draft was about algorithms and graph theory and that it looked rather undeployable and decided it was research-y. I'm fine with discussion of the draft continuing on RTGWG (not that I have any power to stop it anyways), and you might want to try to answer the points I raised in my first mail as part of the discussion you'd like to spark.
eric > -----Original Message----- > From: Balaji venkat Venkataswami [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2012 2:54 PM > To: Eric Osborne (eosborne); [email protected] > Cc: Shankar Raman M J; [email protected] > Subject: Re: Discussion on draft-mjsraman-rtgwg-inter-as-psp-03 > > Including Tony Li > > > On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 12:08 AM, Balaji venkat Venkataswami > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Dear Eric, > > Here is an attempt that we made to get this draft and a few others > entered for consideration in the IRTF. > > Tony Li responded as follows... > > So, the first question is whether or not this counts as research or > engineering. Glancing at it, it looks to me like you're on the engineering > side > of the world. It would then make sense to spark an email discussion on the > rtgwg mailing list. > > You have on the other hand branded this as research. > > Is there a different picture IRTF and IETF see or is it a question of > subjectivity ? > > Your opinion would be most useful. > > thanks and regards, > balaji venkat > > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 8:23 PM, Eric Osborne (eosborne) > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Some comments: > > 1) This is clearly a cut and paste of an academic paper, as > your Acknowledgements indicate. This sort of stuff rarely goes anywhere in > the IETF as the IETF is not a research journal. To move towards > standardization you'd need support from one or more operators stating that > the problem you solve is a real problem for them, and that your solution is > both effective and deployable in practice. Note that this support has more > heft if it comes from the operations side, not from the research department. > Do you have such support? > > 2) Your document assumes massive amounts of cooperation > between ASes, including inter-AS TE LSPs. You may want to investigate the > operational feasibility of this cooperation. > > > > > > eric > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] [mailto:rtgwg- > [email protected]] On Behalf > > Of Balaji venkat Venkataswami > > Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2012 4:10 AM > > To: [email protected] > > Cc: Shankar Raman M J; Gaurav Raina > > Subject: Discussion on draft-mjsraman-rtgwg-inter-as-psp- > 03 > > > > Dear all, > > > > We would like the working group members opinion and > comments on the > > following draft. > > > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mjsraman-rtgwg-inter-as- > psp-03 > > > > Please feel free to comment on the same. > > > > thanks and regards, > > balaji venkat > > > _______________________________________________ rtgwg mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtgwg
