RE: Stable state on ASON signaling requirements?

["Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>]

Hello Lyndon,

> Hi Adrian,
>
> You have a good point that most of the requirements work
> is stable (I think Jonathan did have an outstanding
> comment on call segments).

Yes. This is what Dimitri fixed and circulated, so I think we may be close to done on the
requirements.

> However, it seems to me that we are still early in the
> discussion of solutions.  By making the RSVP draft a
> WG draft, are we settling on its set of solutions?

Well, I'm not sure. What does it mean for a draft to become a WG draft?

It certainly means that the WG is interested in the work, and the work fits within the
charter.
It also means that the control of the content of the draft belongs to the whole WG, not
just the authors.
I suppose it also stops a draft going to the IESG "by the back door" and means that the
draft is up for full debate in the WG.

Do we have to have full agreement on all of the contents of the draft before it becomes a
WG draft? Certainly not. If we did that, we'd go straight to WG last call!

Cheers,
Adrian

> > wrt the ASON signaling solutions draft, you wrote
> > > Its too early to have solutions as a working group item given that we
> > > haven't achieved a "stable state" on the requirements. Working on
> > > solutions at this time will only distract us, creating further negative
> > > pressure.
> > You're right that developing solutions too far while requirements are not
> > stable is a bad thing.
> >
> > However...
> >
> > We have had only one comment about the latest version of the
> > requirements draft from the WG (in Minneapolis and on the list)
> > suggesting that either the draft is stable or the WG doesn't care.
> > (The amount of noise about the solution draft suggests the WG
> > *does* care).
> >
> > The one comment was from you in Minneapolis. Dimitri modified
> > the text accordingly and circulated it. No-one has objected.
> >
> > So, is there any more requirements work to do, or are we at a
> > stable state?
> > Recall the draft is attempting to document the current state of the
> > ASON requirements as they apply to GMPLS signaling and in terms
> > that the IETF can grok.