IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Pesci-discuss] Growing concerns about PESCI

"Spencer Dawkins" <spencer@mcsr-labs.org> Tue, 25 October 2005 19:25 UTC

Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EUUQ2-0005lP-72; Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:25:10 -0400
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1EUUQ0-0005lC-MW for pesci-discuss@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:25:08 -0400
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA14170 for <pesci-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:24:54 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from [63.240.77.82] (helo=sccrmhc12.comcast.net) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EUUcl-0006ys-DS for pesci-discuss@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Oct 2005 15:38:36 -0400
Received: from s73602 (s73602.china.huawei.com[192.35.166.32]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc12) with SMTP id <2005102519225401200ergbae>; Tue, 25 Oct 2005 19:23:02 +0000
Message-ID: <09a301c5d999$73510380$20a623c0@china.huawei.com>
From: "Spencer Dawkins" <spencer@mcsr-labs.org>
To: <pesci-discuss@ietf.org>
References: <web-3031527@multicasttech.com> <92CDAD938E5F923C2ABA7F9B@scan.jck.com>
Subject: Re: [Pesci-discuss] Growing concerns about PESCI
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2005 12:22:09 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2180
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: d6b246023072368de71562c0ab503126
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-BeenThere: pesci-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Process Evolution Study Committee of the IETF discussion <pesci-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss>, <mailto:pesci-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/pesci-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:pesci-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pesci-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss>, <mailto:pesci-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: pesci-discuss-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: pesci-discuss-bounces@ietf.org

Wherever else this discussion heads off to, can we assume that "reporting 
from the BOF to the plenary after a break" is OFF the table? Even 24 hours 
to absorb the discussion would be an improvement...

Spencer

>
> This isn't, however, one of those sorts of design teams either.
> Those teams usually report their results back to a WG or, as
> discussed above, a WG-in-formation, and then more or less close
> down, leaving the WG to sort out the proposal.   That doesn't
> seem to be the plan here either: instead, we get a short BOF
> session, a fifteen minute discussion of how to proceed, then an
> almost-immediate 30 minute report to a plenary, followed by an
> "open meeting" session whose listed "Admin and Operations topics
> only" theme would not seem to admit of discussion of the PESCI
> issues.  So, whatever this is, it isn't a design team in the
> usual sense. 


_______________________________________________
Pesci-discuss mailing list
Pesci-discuss@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pesci-discuss

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email