Re: More comments on draft-aboba-sg-experiment-03.txt

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

 



> I am not sure whether to start a SG after a BOF is the right thing todo. 

Depending on the outcome of the BOF, it may or not be.  A SG can only help 
if a problem important to the Internet community has been identified, if 
the problem is well understood, and if there is sufficient interest/energy 
to take on the work. 

> I personally would think that helping people earlier would be useful 
> (e.g., after one or more Bar-BOFs).
> * Start with with SG as early as possible; no need to wait for a failed 
> BOF

The SG experiment permits that at the AD's discretion.  Personally, I 
would like to see how well this type of SG would work. 

> [Note: If you cannot find any experienced person to help then that's probably
> already an indication that something is really heading into the wrong
> direction.]

This is part of the required "demonstration of interest" for SG formation, 
I would think. 

> For example, at IETF#69 we had an adhoc meeting on SPIT prevention. In short,
> it was a disaster.
>
> We have a few solution approaches, we can envision a problem but we obviously
> do not have a lot of SPIT to determine whether the proposed mechanisms would
> help and which mechanism is more likely to be successful. 
> This is a quite practical example and I would like to better understand
> how the proposals in draft-aboba-sg-experiment-03.txt could help me to make
> progress.

>From your description, it seems that there is not yet enough data to 
develop a problem statement, let alone to evaluate solutions.  In such a 
situation, it seems that the most that could be accomplished would be to 
do a literature review, summarizing the state of the art and perhaps 
identifying problems for further research.  I'm not clear that a SG would 
be the best avenue for that, due to the short duration.  An IRTF RG might 
make more sense. 

> I could also come up with a simpler example, based on the early warning adhoc
> meeting from IETF#69. It is a simpler case since we had constructive
> discussions and there was a lot of support for the work. 

Of of the top of my head, this sounds like it could potentially be a 
better understood problem, for which the SG might be more relevant. 

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]