Re: [Autoconf] Procedure

[Jari Arkko <jari.arkko at piuha.net>]

Alex,

> 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.

No organization on this planet is willing to look at infinitely long 
projects. There's always a deadline. There's always other, competing 
things that we could be spending our time on.

I have tried to identify the reasons why we have not succeeded yet in 
AUTOCONF. Attempting to specify the general theory of all possible 
configuration situations is at the top of my list. This is why the 
charter and myself insist on developing a practical, achievable 
addressing model. One way of doing that is to explain how practical 
networks do it.

Look at the working group. It is one big brain trust - if we stay 
focused we CAN write one ten page document on how ad hoc networks get 
configured.  Really. Then we can move on to more interesting stuff, like 
developing new protocol tools.

Jari