RE: [QOS_INBAND] next steps?

["McGeer, Patrick C" <[e-mail]>]

Magnus,
As I recall, we discussed discussing this in NSIS in Prague, and having
a "bar BoF" there, in preparation for a BoF in Chicago.  John Loughney
was certainly agreeable to discussing this in NSIS, and a number of
people at he meeting in San Diego (John Loughney and Scott Brim, in
particular) strongly suggested that in addition to the steps of forming
a discussion list, that we spend at least one more IETF meeting
socializing the idea before pursuing a BoF, and that NSIS was the
correct venue to start in because there were many others in that group
interested in the same issues.  Both John Harper and I are happy to do
this -- while we're understandably eager to move forward, we also feel
that it's extremely important to do this the right way within IETF,
respecting IETF's procedures and culture, and, most important, fitting
this work in the context of ongoing work within IETF.  NSIS and
QuickStart are two of the most prominent examples.

Cheers
Rick

-----Original Message-----
From: Magnus Westerlund [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 1:59 AM
To: John Harper
Cc: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [QOS_INBAND] next steps?

Hi,

Some comments.

John Harper skrev:
> Lars,
> 
> When we discussed this in San Diego, I believe the agreement was that 
> some time would be scheduled in NSIS to look at the requirements for 
> this work, and I was about to get in touch with John Loughney to ask 
> about this when I got your mail.

I can't remember any agreement on taking work or even a requirements
discussion into NSIS. Talking with the people active in that group is
certainly fine. However as responsible AD for NSIS I don't want any
proposals around this to be handled in NSIS. There are several reasons
for this. You proposal has major impact on the infrastructure and needs
to be discussed openly with good attendance of people from different
fields. Thus a real BOF is needed before any real work can be taken on. 
Putting this discussion into NSIS would hide it from many that would
need to participate in this. Secondly, NSIS should focus on resolving
its own issues so that it can finish the currently ongoing work. I don't
want time taken away from their agenda.

My memory of the agreement was that you should update the drafts,
continue build interest and set together a BOF for these topics. As we
stated in San Diego you needed to get on this directly. As this hasn't
happened I think you will have to focus on building some interest with
key persons, maybe hold a bar-BOF to discuss things.


Cheers

Magnus Westerlund

IETF Transport Area Director & TSVWG Chair
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVA/A
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone [phone]
Torshamsgatan 23           | Fax   [phone]
S-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: [e-mail]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
QOS_INBAND mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/qos_inband

_______________________________________________
QOS_INBAND mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/qos_inband