Re: "checklist" for NIR Report

George Munroe <> Sat, 23 October 1993 21:52 UTC

Received: from by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa03624; 23 Oct 93 17:52 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa03620; 23 Oct 93 17:52 EDT
Received: from by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa17318; 23 Oct 93 17:52 EDT
Via:; Sat, 23 Oct 1993 22:51:58 +0100
X-Version: Mailbase (TM) Enhanced List Manager Version 2.3
Received: from [+JANET.000011200004/FTP.MAIL] by; Sat, 23 Oct 1993 22:47:49 +0100
Date: Sat, 23 Oct 93 22:48 GMT
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: George Munroe <>
Subject: Re: "checklist" for NIR Report
Reply-To: George Munroe <>
Precedence: list
Message-ID: <9310231752.aa17318@CNRI.Reston.VA.US>

I'd just like to follow up Ton's recent message commenting on April's

I agree that what April forwarded is a schematic summary of information
in the NIR report and very useful as a 'quick reference'. It would be
good to finalise it soon.

The other kind of checklist that Ton has referred to,

> collect (how remains to be discussed) all relevant information
> about the NIR tools and present them in a easy to browse (checklist
> like form) way. This "checklist" includes issues brought up by Karen,
> like what underlying stacks does the software need ... what external
> software (or hardware) do you need (viewers, audio cards, etc.) ...

would, as Ton has said, be very useful to support staff and end users
because it would get down to the nitty gritty details of the particular
implementations that people will actually try to install and use.

The UNITE (User Network Interface To Everything) task force which I'm
currently coordinating has been gathering user 'evaluations' of client
software (slowly) and in the process obtaining the type of information
which could go in to the more comprehensive checklist described above.
However the checklist does not exist as such in any formal way -- the
aim of evaluations has been to identify the best features of existing
network interfaces and what's still missing !  What we've got is a
list of client software (including what platform and where to get it
from) and a small number of user reports (based on an evaluation
template) on selections from this list. But work is ongoing and a
fairly objective checklist of sorts is not an unreasonable expectation.

> In Warsaw there was yet another area that could be taken up by NIR:
> server evaluations: what kind of servers are out there, what kind of
> capabilities do they have, to what do they interface, on which
> platforms do they run, etc.

I think this is important and does not overlap with UNITE. A very basic
list of known server software which could be consulted to decide what
software may be most appropriate in particular circumstances would be
invaluable -- especially with so many new server implementations starting
to appear. I second Ton's suggestion that news of server software packages
could be posted to this list and, from ensuing discussion, useful points
could be distilled into a checklist of sorts.

George Munroe