*> *> But that's really not the point here. The role of an _engineering_ taskforceBob, I agree this is a good ethos, which I support, and in general, the IETF is trending back in this direction, the discussion over the last ~year of meatier meetings being one example of the trend in this direction; yours, Keith's and Grenville's expressions being others. The specific issue though in this case, IMO, was whether engineering was conflicting with pragmatics (WRT existing deployments) - happily, the OT thread appears to be flushing this out and moving on. Obviously, the long-lived tension will always be between under-engineering a solution and over-engineering a solution. As this subthread shows, discussing the philosophy doesn't advance the ball on any one particular technical issue very much, only skilled engineers arguing opposing views (a good thing) can do that.
*> is to act like engineers, not a vanity press. Our output should be educated
*> guidance to the wider community - created with diligence and offered with humility.
*> We can do no more and should do no less.
Grenville,
Nicely said!! I would like to see your motto inscribed over the IETF portals... "We create with diligence and offer with humility".
Bob Braden
Best....