IETF Logo Mail Archive

RE: [v6tc] v6tc - is there life

"Karen E. Nielsen (AH/LMD)" <karen.e.nielsen@ericsson.com> Fri, 19 November 2004 07:18 UTC

Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA26946; Fri, 19 Nov 2004 02:18:41 -0500 (EST)
Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CV35A-0004Qi-EB; Fri, 19 Nov 2004 02:21:34 -0500
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CV30x-0005Wk-Bn; Fri, 19 Nov 2004 02:17:03 -0500
Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CV2wu-0004Yf-3p for v6tc@megatron.ietf.org; Fri, 19 Nov 2004 02:12:52 -0500
Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA22056 for <v6tc@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Nov 2004 02:12:50 -0500 (EST)
Received: from albatross.ericsson.se ([193.180.251.49]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CV2zV-0004Ij-Pd for v6tc@ietf.org; Fri, 19 Nov 2004 02:15:44 -0500
Received: from esealmw140.al.sw.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.121]) by albatross.ericsson.se (8.12.10/8.12.10/WIREfire-1.8b) with ESMTP id iAJ7CZvD023360 for <v6tc@ietf.org>; Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:12:35 +0100 (MET)
Received: from esealnt610.al.sw.ericsson.se ([153.88.254.120]) by esealmw140.al.sw.ericsson.se with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:12:33 +0100
Received: from ESEALNT747.al.sw.ericsson.se ([153.88.251.7]) by esealnt610.al.sw.ericsson.se with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2657.72) id WFZKPK23; Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:12:33 +0100
Received: by ESEALNT747.al.sw.ericsson.se with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <J4NDFZ6H>; Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:12:33 +0100
Message-ID: <C26BB8276599A44B85D52F9CE41035E1050B9876@esealnt944.al.sw.ericsson.se>
X-Sybari-Trust: 035d1ac4 ad48f3dd 011e0ca6 00000179
From: "Karen E. Nielsen (AH/LMD)" <karen.e.nielsen@ericsson.com>
To: "'Soininen Jonne (Nokia-NET/Helsinki)'" <jonne.soininen@nokia.com>, ext Alain Durand <Alain.Durand@Sun.COM>
Subject: RE: [v6tc] v6tc - is there life
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:12:28 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Nov 2004 07:12:33.0926 (UTC) FILETIME=[241E1260:01C4CE07]
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 25620135586de10c627e3628c432b04a
Cc: v6tc@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: v6tc@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: v6tc.ietf.org
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6tc>, <mailto:v6tc-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/v6tc>
List-Post: <mailto:v6tc@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:v6tc-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6tc>, <mailto:v6tc-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: v6tc-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: v6tc-bounces@ietf.org
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: cd26b070c2577ac175cd3a6d878c6248

Agree with both of you.

I especially agree with 
providing _qualified_ guidance rather than solid requirements -
we are not in a product development process here.

There has never been doubt about that we should 
use the term goals in the document, only when we(I) speak about it we(I) sometimes
forget the subtle difference and use the term we(I) are more familiar with.

Karen

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Soininen Jonne (Nokia-NET/Helsinki)
> [mailto:jonne.soininen@nokia.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 7:38 PM
> To: ext Alain Durand
> Cc: Karen E. Nielsen (AH/LMD); v6tc@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [v6tc] v6tc - is there life
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I agree with Alain. Let's not use normative text and have "goals"
> instead of requirements. The documents should be guiding of 
> nature - not
> stating hard requirements.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Jonne.
> 
> On Thu, 2004-11-18 at 20:08, ext Alain Durand wrote:
> > On Nov 18, 2004, at 12:44 AM, Karen E. Nielsen (AH/LMD) wrote:
> > > Another issue. I have some problems with SHOULD and MAY 
> requirements.
> > > I would much rather stick with must-only requirements, 
> perhaps with 
> > > the addition
> > > that a certain feature (requirement) possibly could be 
> profited from 
> > > in this and that
> > > deployment scenario. I do not see the point in having SHOULD 
> > > requirements and in general
> > > I do not see the point in using the words MUST, SHOULD 
> and MAY in a 
> > > requirement document.
> > 
> > Karen,
> > 
> > I remember Brian Carpenter strongly advising us to use the 
> term goal 
> > instead
> > of requirements and remove the uppercase normative language.
> > 
> > I makes sense to focus on what is really needed. However, 
> if there are 
> > "really nice to have" things,
> > it might make sense to mention them as such.
> > 
> > 	- Alain.
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > v6tc mailing list
> > v6tc@ietf.org
> > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6tc
> -- 
> Jonne Soininen
> Nokia
> 
> Tel: +358 40 527 46 34
> E-mail: jonne.soininen@nokia.com
> 

_______________________________________________
v6tc mailing list
v6tc@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/v6tc

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email