-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Jari Arkko wrote: > Dave, > >> I see >> you gave one example, the effect of delay or packet >> drop...; actually we need a more tightly scoped >> description even than that to build an experimental >> design (e.g., effect on what, in what topology, >> etc.). You get my point. > > Sure. I was just giving an example, and it know it was too vague. I > think it would be great if the charter had specific language about this, > or if writing the list of most important things to measure would itself > be a deliverable. As I noted in my other post, this (and some other suggestions on experiment plans, etc.) seems like a great idea to document in an IRTF group (or RRG subgroup) on 'experimenting with the LISP protocol documented in the LISP WG', but outside the scope of the LISP WG itself. Joe -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkl3WQ4ACgkQE5f5cImnZrvqdQCgne6FAEx9hiyy1cdXiUtJCVSJ 6tsAoKlabTsjJoID6NqQJicsk9+p/4Hx =atie -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Int-area mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
