Re: first steps (was The other parts of the report...)

Dave Crocker <> Mon, 13 September 2004 18:53 UTC

Received: from ( []) by (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA25524; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 14:53:01 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ([]) by with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C6w1V-0007C9-1f; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 14:57:58 -0400
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([] by with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C6vuA-0005le-Pf; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 14:50:22 -0400
Received: from ([] by with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1C6veP-0002o4-Fv for; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 14:34:05 -0400
Received: from ( []) by (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA23912 for <>; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 14:34:04 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ([] by with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1C6vj7-0006kv-20 for; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 14:39:00 -0400
Received: from bbprime ( []) by (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id i8DIXMg11561; Mon, 13 Sep 2004 11:33:22 -0700
Date: Mon, 13 Sep 2004 11:33:17 -0700
From: Dave Crocker <>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <>
To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <>
In-Reply-To: <06FA98100EA238EA6546E721@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126>
References: <> <> <> <06FA98100EA238EA6546E721@B50854F0A9192E8EC6CDA126>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 4adaf050708fb13be3316a9eee889caa
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: first steps (was The other parts of the report...)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Dave Crocker <>
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-Spam-Score: 0.8 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 8b431ad66d60be2d47c7bfeb879db82c
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


HTA>  but if you add together:
HTA> I actually think we are reasonably close to a description.

     That is quite a bit like saying that the presence of a requirements
     document means that we are 'reasonably close' to a protocol
     specification. If that were actually a valid assessment, we would
     not have problems producing protocol specifications after having a
     requirements document, and it would not take very long.

     However, if you think we are "reasonably close", then it will not
     be difficult for you to produce the document that contains the
     necessary detail, so it can be inspected for concreteness, accuracy
     and completeness.

HTA> I had one series of conversations where I tried to explain what the
HTA> secretariat does, and ended up with a puzzled "but where's the big 
HTA> expensive problem?" - our activities may be far less extraordinary than we
HTA> may think.

     First of all, for any interesting topic, there will always be some
     people representing any given point of view.  So it is not at all
     significant that you found someone who thinks that none of this is
     a big deal.

     It would be more interesting to find someone who believes that and
     who has real experience organizing and operating the relevant
     activities (events and processes) that the IETF needs to get done.

     You will not find such a person, because the actual details
     required to conduct an operation like this are substantial, and the
     constant attention to that detail required to keep things running
     smoothly is daunting.

 Dave Crocker <dcrocker-at-brandenburg-dot-com>
 Brandenburg InternetWorking <>
 Sunnyvale, CA  USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>

Ietf mailing list