RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D?ch

Isn't there a "best practices" genre of RFC which might pertain?

Jim McQuaid

-----Original Message-----
From: bmwg-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:bmwg-bounces@ietf.org]On Behalf Of
Russ White
Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 3:51 PM
To: sporetsky@quarrytech.com
Cc: hcb@gettcomm.com; jim.mcquaid@netiq.com; bmwg@ietf.org
Subject: RE: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D?ch

> As interesting as this paper is, I always found it to be a tough fit for 
> the BMWG.  This proposed work item has no related terminology or 
> methodology draft.  The tests are not clearly described in the paper and 
> refer to the need to simulate hundreds of nodes for a lab benchmark test. 
> I went through the thread from last April '04 (6 months ago) and read 
> numerous responses in objection to this becoming a work item.  My mind is 
> open to be changed so can you please clearly explain what is being 
> benchmarked, how it is being benchmarked, and why you think this is 
> appropriate for the BMWG.

I suppose the question comes down to this: Is it worth having informational 
documents that provide general background and knoweldge gained from 
experience to people writing other testing documents, and actually running 
tests? Is the only thing the WG can publish actual tests, or can it also 
publish documents explaining how to test, in general, and other work in the 
area of benchmarking?

I would think informational documents about how to test in general, about 
methods and mechanisms, would also be useful.

:-)

Russ

__________________________________
riw@cisco.com CCIE <>< Grace Alone

_______________________________________________
bmwg mailing list
bmwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg

_______________________________________________
bmwg mailing list
bmwg@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg