Re: [OPSAWG] call for opsawg agenda time requests

["David Harrington" <ietfdbh at comcast.net>]

Hi, 

> I share your concerns, but this document is right now no more than
an
> individual submission I-D. Bringing it to the attention of 
> the community
> is fine, OPSAWG may be the right forum. Only further discussions can
> enlighten whether it will be submitted as WG item, or other form of
> document requesting IETF consensus. 

Which raises another concern.

When I saw the email from Hideki, I thought to myself "what, yet
another presentation on this work?"
Hopefully, the presentation will answer these questions: is this
document going to be proposed as an OPSAWG wg item? How is this work
relevant to the IETF standards-development function?
If it is NOT going to be proposed as a WG item, why is the
presentation relevant to this WG?
If it is NOT going to be proposed as an IETF document, why is the
presentation relevant to the IETF?
Maybe this presentation should be targeted at the NMRG.
Maybe this presentation should be targeted at a research conference
rather than the IETF Standards Development Organization.

I normally would not consider such a presentation to be a concern. It
is useful to understand other people's thinking on what needs to be
operated and managed, especially if it concerns what existing
standards are not addressing adequately. For example, Juergen S did a
presentation on emerging requirements for low-power applications, and
Juergen Q did a presentation on power management. I found them useful
presentations that were definitely relevant to (potential) IETF work. 

But I think this is about six IETFs in a row where we have been
treated to presentations from Hideki about his project. I want to
understand Hideki's intentions relative to the IETF and OPSAWG. Is the
presentation (and paper) actually relevant to work being done in the
IETF? Is he proposing that this work be IETF work? 

The paper's lack of discussion of relevant IETF work (e.g., the
ENTITY-MIB) makes me question why the IETF should be repeatedly
scheduling Hideki's presentations. 

The IETF mailing list is deep in discussions about whether we really
must have Friday sessions, and whether we are effectively using the
time in the sessions that are scheduled. 

What exactly does this presentation/paper have to do with the WG?
What exactly does this presentation/paper have to do with the IETF? 
What exactly does this presentation/paper have to do with
standardizing Internet technologies?

dbh