Re: [ncrg] Request to make the Framework draft an RG document

Michael,

I think having a framework document as an RG document is most helpful.

One area that this framework document seems to oscillate around is the relationship or complexity metrics to the overall definition of complexity. First, the Abstract seems to imply the need for a metric on network complexity as a whole, to be able to define complexity. Second, the problem space attempts to use some proxies for complexity metrics approximation or correlation. But then, Section 4.1 "Definitions and Metrics" and Section 4.2, "Comparative Analysis", seem to shy away a bit from metrics that can be applied to a network.

Thanks,

-- Carlos.

On Jan 9, 2013, at 5:51 AM, Michael Behringer (mbehring) <mbehring@cisco.com> wrote:

> Geoff and I had a call a couple of days ago. We're planning to re-spin the framework draft, take in the inputs received, and issue a new version. 
> 
> This new version should be issued as an IRTF document (draft-irtf-ncrg-..). While there is no formal process in the IRTF on how to make a document an rg document, let's apply the usual IETF policy here. 
> 
> Thus: Who is in favour of making the framework draft an RG document? 
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-behringer-complexity-framework/ 
> 
> Michael
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ncrg mailing list
> ncrg@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/ncrg
> 