Re: [Idr] community of the day - common header

[Jared Mauch <[e-mail]>]

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 04:22:12PM +0200, Robert Raszuk wrote:
> Hi Mikael,
> 
> Being nearly 17 year a vendor I can tell you that nothing works better for
> the account team then fear of loosing a customer or at min part of their
> business.
> 
> Introducing a second vendor always raises the alarm even if customers do
> not always see it :)
> 
> Worst case is vendor lock .. in such a case indeed you can't do much.
> 
> - - -
> 
> Bottom line - no one here is trying to delay or deny urgent need for large
> comms. We are just trying (and trust me there is daily a lot of
> conversations about it) to pack it in the proper envelope.
> 
> Considering the speed of standardization process itself and various phases
> current discussion is really in the best interest to make it as fast as
> possible an RFC.
> 
> Imagine that now working group just blindly passes it though then
> directorate review or IESG review will reject it - as not discussed in the
> WG. So it will go back to where we are today and it will not be in any
> interest of the community.

	In my opinion there is some emergening consensus on a few topics.
I'm hoping we can optimize on a minimum set of document(s) that have broad
support.

> As John already said the other day seeing few emails from those who were
> not even subscribed to IDR - IETF WG rough consensus is really not about
> counting "+1s" from folks who never actively participate in the IDR WG work
> or mailing list discussions.

	I think there is danger here we should clearly avoid.  Counting +1's
is valuable for some definition of value, but we must drive for consensus
in the WG.  This means not everyone may be happy, be it Me, Jeff, Job, Jakob,
Keyur, Robert, Bruno, Mikael, Gert or anyone else.

	having watched this pot be stirred, i'm seeing enough people
motivated to do something, which I think will drive the necessary review
of any documentes adopted in the WG.

	- Jared


> 
> Cheers,
> R.
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 4:09 PM, Mikael Abrahamsson <[e-mail]>
> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 14 Sep 2016, Robert Raszuk wrote:
> >
> > Get what out of the door ? Are you asking IDR to give you code to run in
> >> your network ?
> >>
> >
> > I'm asking IDR to get the document out the door. We can hit the vendors
> > over the head for implementations after that just fine, thank you.
> >
> > And having worked at operators since 1999, I can tell you that getting
> > through the account teams is designed to be hard. The answer is always
> > "you're the only one asking for this". I've been told this so many times
> > (which usually was a lie) it's very upsetting to read your text about
> > operators not trying hard enough. What should we have done? All camped
> > outside John Chambers office with banners demanding this, or what?
> >
> >
> > --
> > Mikael Abrahamsson    email: [e-mail]
> >

> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr


-- 
Jared Mauch  | pgp key available via finger from [e-mail]
clue++;      | http://puck.nether.net/~jared/  My statements are only mine.