Re: spending time on analysis [Re: draft-palet-v6ops-proto41-nat-03 as WG item]

["JORDI PALET MARTINEZ" <jordi.palet@consulintel.es>]

Pekka,

While I agree in the importance of the analysis word, and I try to spend some of my time on it, there is nothing in the charter that doesn't allow to continue other works in parallel, that doesn't define new transition mechanism. By the way, I'm still waiting your reply on this to my previous email.

Not allowing the WG to work on what they feel is interesting, is definitively mining the WG effort, and avoiding the progress.

Most of the WG participants are in the REAL market, and we know what is going there, and we know that if IETF doesn't do the work soon, we will have non-IETF solutions, what clearly is much worst.

We need to be much more flexible in the process and allow for some parallel work. Obviously it could mean that some of the documents couldn't go to last call. FINE ! Hopefully we will have a bunch of things to go to last call together in a few months.

PLEASE, do allow and facilitate the pro-activity and democracy of the WG, and if needed allow the WG to interpret the charter instead of mandating what you or the AD or the IESG or whoever feels is correct, while the WG doesn't believe in it. Otherwise, this will not longer be a WG, just a bunch of people willing to work outside of IETF.

Regards,
Jordi

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Pekka Savola" <pekkas@netcore.fi>
To: <mariana.nikolova@philips.com>
Cc: <v6ops@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 10:24 AM
Subject: spending time on analysis [Re: draft-palet-v6ops-proto41-nat-03 as WG item]


> On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 mariana.nikolova@philips.com wrote:
> > During the plenary there was a clear indication from the WG members that 
> > the group spends too much time on analysis/scenarios/aspects and this 
> > process has to be speeded up. I do hope this will happen.
> 
> On the contrary, the WG spends too *little* time on analysis work, which 
> is the reason for all the perceived problems of timeliness.
> 
> Our problem is that only few seem to care about it at all, just complain
> that we aren't doing transition mechanisms and other stuff to suit the
> market windows.  That's not going to happen until we're done.
> 
> If everyone pitched in in the final rush for the analysis/scenarios work, 
> we might actually be done soon!  I certainly see a hope of progress in the 
> short term, but then again, we need more input to the work!
> 
> This was probably said already two years ago, but folks didn't take it 
> seriously, so you see the effect..
> 
> Please, *DO* participate in the analysis/scenarios effort!
> 
> -- 
> Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
> Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
> Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings
>

**********************************
Madrid 2003 Global IPv6 Summit
Presentations and videos on line at:
http://www.ipv6-es.com

This electronic message contains information which may be privileged or confidential. The information is intended to be for the use of the individual(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the contents of this information, including attached files, is prohibited.