[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Network Configuration BOF - comments to IAB

At 11:01 PM 3/17/2003 +0100, Wijnen, Bert (Bert) wrote:

[added iesg on the cc: list. Fred I assume that is OK,
 I did not see that there was anything in your email report
 that seemed for IAB only, was there?]

no problem
> As to whether a WG should be chartered, I think that's up to the operators.
> If they're not going to deploy it, we shouldn't build it, and what I would
> hope to hear is a strong message from the operator community that this
> specifically is what they want. Given that, I think the proposal is a
> reasonable phase I of the project.
>

Not sure if you were still in the room at the end.
I left a couple of minutes before the end, to have lunch with my daughter. Sorry.

But I asked the BOF chairs explicitly to poll the OPERATORS
My reading was:

- some 30 or so operator hands went up when we specifically asked
  if OPERATORS support this work to be done
- no hands went up when we asked if there were any OPERATORS who would
  object to this work to be undertaken
- Some 10 hands went up when we asked which OPERATORS would commit
  to actively participate in a potential WG.

Randy, was your reading similar?
My point was actually a commitment to implement it, but this is probably as close as we can reasonably get to that question.

My own thinking is that we want/need a (co-)chair from the operator
community as well.
yes, that would be good. We want the Ops and the NM folks to both own it, so that there is never a question of "but is what you did what we asked you to do?"