Re: [idn] Future of the requirements document

[Rick H Wesson <wessorh@ar.com>]

Soobok Lee:

On Thu, 20 Dec 2001, Soobok Lee wrote:


[snip]
>
> If we drop the agreed-on requirement document that solutions can't
> satify yet, we will look like a ostrich who buries its head in the
> sand before a tiger.

we don't agree that we should have the document, this is just one reason
why we don't have a requirement document.

> What really matter is whether or not we should ignore unsatisfied
> requirement items. Fixing old one and writing new one, either one
> cannot avoid this issue.

why don't you draft up the requirements document and see if you can get
everyone to agree to it? Since you have the energy, direct it in a
positive fassion and write.

> >
> > Thus assuming we all actually want to see an IDN solution soon it seems
> > to make a lot more sense to drop the requirement document.
>
> No one would like to eat unbaked or half-baked or rotten cakes,
> however soon they come out. If IETF is ever driven by consumers and
> work for consumers, current provider-centric haste and biases in IDN
> WG could not have been tolerated.

ummm, ok thats my quote you are butchering, but thats ok. The point is
we don't need to write requirements that we can'e agree on after we agree
on our final set of documents. look, everyone has had alot of time to work
out these matters. If you want the requirement document so badly get
everyone to agree, write the doc, then get everyone to postpone while we
evaluate if the proposals fit the requirements. sure, you get everone else
to agree with you and i'm in too.

-rick