Re: [ippm] Call for adoption: draft-morton-ippm-initial-registry

[Juergen Schoenwaelder <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

since an empty registry is of little value, I think having a initial
content defined somewhere is essential. In fact, I believe initial
content _and_ at least one concrete use case example is essential in
order to know that the registry itself is practically useful.

I am mostly active in LMAP and not too closely following IPPM so
please forgive my ignorance. But I generally do believe that a proof
of practical usability is essential for good specifications. Hence,
concrete metric registry examples might help to convince us that the
registry is a cool thing to have or they might show us how to make the
registry simpler or easier to use.

/js

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 06:45:00PM +0000, STARK, BARBARA H wrote:
> +1
> And I'm sorry I totally missed replying to this call in my get-ready-for-holidays frenzied mode (in December).
> Barbara
> 
> > I support the adoption of this draft as a WG item. It is needed to create
> > entries for the currently defined IPPM metrics into the metric registry and is
> > complementary to work coming out of the LMAP WG.
> > 
> > Jason
> > 
> > On 12/10/15, 8:49 AM, "ippm on behalf of Brian Trammell"
> > <[e-mail] on behalf of [e-mail]> wrote:
> > 
> > >Greetings, all,
> > >
> > >Following support in the room for the adoption of
> > >draft-morton-ippm-initial-registry in Yokohama, this message starts a
> > >formal call for adoption of the following milestone:
> > >
> > >July 2016: submit a Standards Track document to the IESG defining
> > >initial contents of performance metric registry
> > >
> > >in support of paragraph 7 of our charter:
> > >
> > >  Agreement about the definitions of metrics and methods of measurement
> > >  enables accurate, reproducible, and equivalent results across
> > >different
> > >  implementations. To this end, the WG will define and maintain a
> > >registry of
> > >  metric definitions. The WG encourages work which assesses the
> > >comparability
> > >  of measurements of IPPM metrics with metrics developed elsewhere. The
> > >WG
> > >  also encourages work which improves the availability of information
> > >about
> > >  the context in which measurements were taken.
> > >
> > >and to adopt draft-morton-ippm-initial-registry as the document for
> > >this milestone.
> > >
> > >Please express support or concerns with adopting this document by 31
> > >December 2015 to the IPPM working group mailing list, [e-mail]
> > >
> > >Many thanks, best regards,
> > >
> > >Brian Trammell (chair hat)
> > 
> > 
> > ________________________________
> > 
> > This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Time Warner Cable
> > proprietary information, which is privileged, confidential, or subject to
> > copyright belonging to Time Warner Cable. This E-mail is intended solely for
> > the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you are not the
> > intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any
> > dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the
> > contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be
> > unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender
> > immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail
> > and any printout.
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > ippm mailing list
> > [e-mail]
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ippm mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ippm

-- 
Juergen Schoenwaelder           Jacobs University Bremen gGmbH
Phone: [phone]         Campus Ring 1 | 28759 Bremen | Germany
Fax:   [phone]         <http://www.jacobs-university.de/>