Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big

Melinda Shore <shore@arsc.edu> Wed, 07 April 2010 17:24 UTC

Message-Id: <F3361D13-DCC4-4E6B-AF64-7654C03EFACF@arsc.edu>
From: Melinda Shore <shore@arsc.edu>
To: carlw@mcsr-labs.org
In-Reply-To: <010401cad673$9e2ca6f0$da85f4d0$@org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936)
Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2010 09:23:07 -0800
References: <C6A1D07CACFDBD4D9422C7D7ED288D41041896117A@34093-MBX-C01.mex07a.mlsrvr.com> <4BBC9B0C.5050207@stpeter.im> <C6A1D07CACFDBD4D9422C7D7ED288D41041896119B@34093-MBX-C01.mex07a.mlsrvr.com> <D7AB7C87-E8F6-496B-9D37-E13FAED746F2@cisco.com> <008001cad669$a4d0add0$440c7c0a@china.huawei.com> <010401cad673$9e2ca6f0$da85f4d0$@org>
Cc: clouds@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big
Precedence: list

This all seems really incoherent to me.

The usual approach is "Here's a problem, let's solve it" or
sometimes "Here's a problem and here's the solution."
Undertaking a gap analysis suggests that there's not a problem
that's been identified, but that people want to undertake work
in the area, don't want to work with the other bodies for
whatever reasons, and so are looking for a problem that somebody
else hasn't tackled (yet).  I'm considerably more comfortable
with work being driven by a real problem that's already been
identified, personally.

Melinda

[clouds] Use cases Gene Golovinsky
Re: [clouds] Use cases Peter Saint-Andre
Re: [clouds] Use cases Gene Golovinsky
Re: [clouds] Use cases Mark Webb
Re: [clouds] Use cases Gene Golovinsky
[clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Linda Dunbar
Re: [clouds] Use cases Mark Webb
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Carl Williams
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Linda Dunbar
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Melinda Shore
[clouds] 答复: Re: Use cases meng.yu
Re: [clouds] Use cases Bhumip Khasnabish
Re: [clouds] Use cases Masum Hasan (masum)
Re: [clouds] Use cases Bhumip Khasnabish
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Gene Golovinsky
Re: [clouds] Use cases Gene Golovinsky
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Mark Webb
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Gene Golovinsky
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Sam Johnston
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Sam Johnston
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Linda Dunbar
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Bhumip Khasnabish
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big So, Ning
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Linda Dunbar
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Masum Hasan (masum)
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Masum Hasan (masum)
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Mark Carlson
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Melinda Shore
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Mark Carlson
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Gene Golovinsky
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Mark Webb
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Stephen Fleece
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Linda Dunbar
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Sam Johnston
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Mark Carlson
[clouds] (no subject) zhangyunfei
[clouds] (no subject) zhangyunfei
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Monique Morrow (mmorrow)
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Ning Zong
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Sun Shaoling
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Bhumip Khasnabish
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Bhumip Khasnabish
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Bhumip Khasnabish
Re: [clouds] Scope of the Cloud is too big Romascanu, Dan (Dan)