Re: Requirements for manageability in the routing area

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

Agree.
Depends on the next step that is intended.
I would be comfortable with the next step (assuming successful 3933 
completion in PCE) being a widening of the experiment.
I would also be happy if more WGs want to join the initial experiment, but 
that is out of my hands.

A
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Pekka Savola" <pekkas@netcore.fi>
To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>
Cc: "David Kessens" <david.kessens@nokia.com>; "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" 
<dromasca@avaya.com>; <ops-area@ops.ietf.org>; "Avri Doria" <avri@acm.org>; 
"'Jean Philippe Vasseur'" <jvasseur@cisco.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 12, 2006 2:55 PM
Subject: Re: Requirements for manageability in the routing area


> On Wed, 12 Jul 2006, Adrian Farrel wrote:
> > - It would be good to have formal output from the 'experiment' so
> > that the wider IETF (and in particular the IESG) can judge the
> > results and decide about applying the idea more widely. Of course
> > there are many ways to provide this feedback, but it seemed to me
> > that 3933 has a suitable framework.
>
> Maybe we should do a staged approach -- after experience from PCE, propose 
> a 3933 experiment to be done on more WGs.  Or alternatively, do a 3933 
> experiment _now_ on more WGs (say about 5-10).  Deciding the results of a 
> 3933 experiment based on one or two WGs raises the question whether the 
> size of "N" is large enough..
>
> --
> Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
> Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
> Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings