Re: Resolving geo discussions

[Pekka Savola <pekkas@netcore.fi>]

On Fri, 2 May 2003, Kurt Erik Lindqvist wrote:
> >> Instead of reviewing proposals in depth it might make more sense
> >> to task somebody with doing a compare and contrast between the 
> >> different
> >> proposals and use such a presentation as the focus for discussion.
> >>
> >> That approach tends to lead to more focus on the problem and the 
> >> possible
> >> approaches with less of "my proposal is better than yours" type of 
> >> discussion.
> >
> > Totally agree here.
> >
> > We shouldn't discuss proposals, but rather talk in some "meta"
> > multihoming level.
> >
> > We need to have better picture what we want and can do before getting 
> > down
> > to business and digging holes...
> 
> Maybe (most likely) this will be the outcome of Vienna. Still, I feel 
> that given the time that have passed, and the fact that there are a 
> number proposals out there, they deserve the chance to present them. I 
> think I can already guess the outcome of this, but I think that 
> although we need to agree where to move we also need to listen to 
> peoples ideas on what the steps are. I personally like the idea of a 
> number of design teams as a first step. But this is the discussion we 
> need to have.

As long as this doesn't significantly reduce the time available for other 
issues (as it would seem likely), this approach is OK with me.

5-10 mins per method seems useless to me (you can only present the short
version of the method -- which mostly everybody should know already, and
there would be little time for discussion).  Much better have just one
person sum all of them up, and if there are significant updates later, get
back to them then.

-- 
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings