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

Kevin Dubray <kdubray@juniper.net> Wed, 21 January 2004 18:21 UTC

Received: from optimus.ietf.org ([132.151.1.19]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA02402 for <bmwg-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 13:21:34 -0500 (EST)
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=www1.ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AjMyL-0001iH-Oi; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 13:21:01 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by optimus.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.20) id 1AjMxh-0001i0-HL for bmwg@optimus.ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 13:20:21 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA02380 for <bmwg@ietf.org>; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 13:20:17 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ietf-mx ([132.151.6.1]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AjMxf-00034C-00 for bmwg@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 13:20:19 -0500
Received: from exim by ietf-mx with spam-scanned (Exim 4.12) id 1AjMwl-00032A-00 for bmwg@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 13:19:24 -0500
Received: from colo-dns-ext1.juniper.net ([207.17.137.57]) by ietf-mx with esmtp (Exim 4.12) id 1AjMwP-0002zV-00 for bmwg@ietf.org; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 13:19:01 -0500
Received: from magenta.juniper.net (magenta.juniper.net [172.17.28.122]) by colo-dns-ext1.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id i0LIIOl73185; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:18:24 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kdubray@juniper.net)
Received: from juniper.net (ssh3.juniper.net [207.17.136.47]) by magenta.juniper.net (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id i0LIIJf31224; Wed, 21 Jan 2004 10:18:19 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from kdubray@juniper.net)
Message-ID: <400EC26A.1040100@juniper.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 13:18:18 -0500
From: Kevin Dubray <kdubray@juniper.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0.2) Gecko/20021120 Netscape/7.01 (CK-SillyDog)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: bmwg@ietf.org
CC: Russ White <riw@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60 (1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on ietf-mx.ietf.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=5.0 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.60
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [bmwg] Is the BMWG a proper home for this I-D?
Sender: bmwg-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: bmwg-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: bmwg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg>, <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Benchmarking Methodology Working Group <bmwg.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:bmwg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bmwg>, <mailto:bmwg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Supporters of the BMWG:

A [long] while back, Russ White approached the BMWG with an individually 
submitted I-D
that presented considerations when measuring network convergence:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-white-network-benchmark-00.txt

The draft seeks to highlight: ...considerations that testers should be 
aware of when
attempting to measure network convergence using various methods. 
(Adapted from the I-D's
abstract.)

Not being a pure terminology or methodological statement, or 
constraining itself to
laboratory evaluations, the topic might not be a perfect fit as BMWG 
output.  On the
other hand, the community might benefit from memo on this topic.

Please offer your comments in two dimensions: a) does the topic merit 
future effort, and
b) is the BMWG the best home for this effort (as opposed to another WG 
or progressing the
work as an Individually submitted I-D)?  (You might have to read the WG 
Charter to determine
part B. :-)

Please offer your input directly to this list.

Thanks.


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