Hi Xiaohu,
In fact, the situation is even more straightforward than that. When we started work on this topic, we gave ourselves a two year schedule. When we had not reached rough consensus within that time, we gave ourselves another whole year to converge. So, this has hardly been a rush. Regards, Tony On 3/26/10 4:51 PM, "Christopher LILJENSTOLPE" <i...@cdl.asgaard.org> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > Greetings Xiaohu, > > That discussion has been going on for a long time already. I won't speak for > the chairs, but the intent may be to focus the group on driving to a rough > consensus on the most likely path(s) forward, rather than continuing along in > a debating society. Then again, I may be completely wrong here.... > > However, if I am not, please remember, that from the time that something gets > done in the IRTF, it has to go to the IETF, get standardized, rolled into > code, regressed, bug stomped, and then the hard work starts. My (as an > operator) engineers have to understand it to design a network using it, my > planners have to understand it to account for whatever we are doing in their > planning formula, I have to train the NOC guys to use it, I have to train my > testing guys to test it, I have to find a non-sucky implementation of it, then > buy it, kick off a deployment program, rack it, stack it, commission it, and > then start using it in production. I completely left any OSS/BSS impacts out > of the litany because, if I thought about that, I'd just fall gibbering into a > dark abyss and never come out..... And then there are the impacts on my > peering agreements, interconnection contracts, etc (that means lawyers - oh > my, time to start drinking....) > > Some of those pain points go away if it is an implementation approach, with no > new standards/protocols work required. However, by no means to all (or even > most) of those go away. I get to take the IETF delay inducing factor out, but > the rest are all still there. > > In short, the IRTF producing a recommendation 1 year before I need it would > not only be not helpful, it would actually be ignored or at worse, harmful. > > Chris > > On 27 Mar 2010, at 08.35 , xuxiaohu 41208 wrote: > >> Hi Tony, >> >> Is there a so strict deadline for submitting a RRG recommendation that makes >> the RRG (co-chairs) to make such a hurried recommedation for a scalable >> routing and addressing architecture which is deemed to be useful in a long >> period of time? >> >> Is it reasonable to give us some time (e.g., three or four months) to argue >> against these candidate solutions so that we can realize whether or not all >> of them deserve the recommendation? >> >> Best regards, >> Xiaohu >> >> ----- 原邮件 ----- >> 发件人: Tony Li <tony...@tony.li> >> 日期: 星期五, 三月 26日, 2010 下午2:13 >> 主题: Re: [rrg] Recommendation >> 收件人: Scott Brim <scott.b...@gmail.com>, Noel Chiappa >> <j...@mercury.lcs.mit.edu> >> 抄送: Tony Li <t...@cisco.com>, rrg@irtf.org >> >>> >>> >>> >>>>>> the recommendation of the [chairs of the] RRG >>>>> >>>>> IFYP. >>>> >>>> ? >>> >>> >>> I grep'ed for that and came up with things that didn't make sense. >>> I >>> suspect that Noel meant "IF You Please". >>> >>> While there is no argument that this is not a consensus based >>> recommendation, IRTF outcomes are not required to be consensus >>> based. So >>> while Noel's amended version is correct, the original is also correct. >>> >>> Just so we're all clear, I'm very disappointed that we were unable >>> to make >>> further progress in reaching consensus. >>> >>> Tony >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> rrg mailing list >>> rrg@irtf.org >>> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> rrg mailing list >> rrg@irtf.org >> http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg > > - - --- > 李柯睿 > Check my PGP key here: > https://www.asgaard.org/~cdl/cdl.asc > > > - --- > 李柯睿 > Check my PGP key here: > https://www.asgaard.org/~cdl/cdl.asc > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJLrUhqAAoJEGmx2Mt/+Iw/swcH/3fNV6Pi6+E9e3fNJy5UwwvA > J+t0bWhfLqRxEun7p+7y5LGlwygiUZNgytrrdTfQ4IwUY3dzJUT989lsKHEYjDJj > F2DaRnxDsMol54HKYzjckk2zZLe9+j9af03GDHjkMGPV3rcxI3wVQ6j8L8UE8c0N > ihcXP9guF/eTN2ZQcPK2rhc1IgBb6qXxA5o2Q5AQgD+78+aysc6xx8aHln6Ttsxd > 9+wafT0HTiqiQZLo97n5QvI3XvUGbePOKZJSTJLYNLrv958F0G7M7zcJF2PFiw3W > fD3exou6w/DubM1qSHGXgmNFwy8DZsSncxpzRPGVr26VyL09wxpZsUw77QAN7hA= > =Fc5M > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ rrg mailing list rrg@irtf.org http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/rrg
