 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jari Arkko a écrit :
Carlos,I don't buy the "we are in a hurry" argument :-)I don't mind discussing both documents in Hiroshima -- even if (hopefully) one is a WG document, I'm sure discussion of both can be useful for the WG, and improves both documents. At least the discussion is on-topic for the working group's #1 deliverable.However, you ARE in a hurry. Precisely because its already taken so many years. We really need to see short-term result from the addressing model document, or we must question how useful it is for all of us to put cycles into this working group. Its really publish-or-perish for the WG, quite literally :-)
Jari,I do not accept this pressure. It's not my fault these years of non-achievements - I wasn't in AUTOCONF.
One would better try to identify _why_ there are non-productive AUTOCONF years of reasons behind us. See how the same lack of procedure (no agenda, no formal calls, secrecy, and more) is in action now.
Putting pressure is not solving the problem - moreover it scares people away.
If there is such pressure one would also consider the AD sponsoring way, why not(?)
Alex
Jari _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf at ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf