Re: [Dime] comments on draft-tsou-dime-realm-based-redirect-00

["Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca at avaya.com>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Glen Zorn [mailto:gwz at net-zen.net] 
> Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:37 PM
> To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); 'Tschofenig, Hannes (NSN - 
> FI/Espoo)'; 'ext Sebastien Decugis'; 'Tina TSOU'
> Cc: dime at ietf.org
> Subject: RE: [Dime] comments on 
> draft-tsou-dime-realm-based-redirect-00
> 
> Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:dromasca at avaya.com] writes:
> 
> ...
> 
> > > You're kidding, right?  If we waited for operators to notice a 
> > > problem before tackling it IPv6 development would have 
> started last 
> > > week ;-).
> > >
> > 
> > Maybe, but we are in OPS and we do protocols and data models for 
> > operators here. So even if we do not enjoy the 
> participation of many 
> > operators in this WG nowadays asking whether at least the 
> vendors who 
> > are proposing a piece of work are basing their proposal on 
> > requirements they hear from operators and end-users seems to me a 
> > reasonable sanity checking method for dealing with such 'hums'.
> 
> Possibly so, but here's a question that may cast some light 
> upon the validity of this approach: How many years elapsed 
> between the publication of RFC 3588 & (some) operators' 
> discovery that they needed the protocol we're busily extending?
> 
> > 
> > Dan
> 
> 

I am not making the argument that popular demand should be the only way
we decide what to do. What I am saying is that there are cases when a WG
can use operators and users input as a way to filter and prioritize -
especially when the WG has more new things to do proposed than it is
capable to execute. 

Dan

>